Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T22:05:08.241Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

10 - Electrophysiology of Semantic Violations and Lexical Ambiguity Resolution in Bilingual Sentence Processing

from Part IV - Neuroscience of Bilingual Lexical Access

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 December 2019

By
Karolina Rataj
Edited by
Roberto R. Heredia  and
Anna B. Cieślicka
Roberto R. Heredia
Affiliation:
Texas A & M University
Anna B. Cieślicka
Affiliation:
Texas A & M University
Get access

Summary

This chapter presents an overview of the current electrophysiological findings in the area of bilingual semantic processing. Apart from the discussion of semantic violations, it extends to topics such as lexical semantic anticipation, semantic ambiguity, meaning construction, and interlingual homograph processing. Specifically, the chapter focuses on the changes in amplitudes and latency of the N400 and the Late Positive Complex (LPC) by such participant characteristics as age of exposure, proficiency level, and language dominance. Special attention is devoted to how semantic constraints influence the processing of words in the L2 in sentence context as visible in modulations of the N400 and LPC components. Finally, neural oscillations are discussed, in particular the relationship between increases in theta oscillations and semantic processing in the L1 and L2.

Keywords

age of acquisitionbilingual sentence processingbiphasic N400-P600 effectcognates event-related potential (ERP)interlingual homographsLate Positive Complex (LPC)lexical semantic anticipation effectmetaphoroscillatory dynamicssemantic ambiguitysemantic congruity N400 effectsemantic violationtheta oscillations
Type
Chapter
Information
Bilingual Lexical Ambiguity Resolution , pp. 250 - 272
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Further Reading

Jessen, A., & Felser, C. (2018). Reanalysing object gaps during non-native sentence processing: Evidence from ERPs. Second Language Research, 35(2), 285–300.Google Scholar
Osterhout, L., McLaughlin, J., Kim, A., Greenwald, R., & Inoue, K. (2004). Sentences in the brain: Event-related potentials as real-time reflections of sentence comprehension and language learning. In Carreiras, M. & Clifton, C. Jr. (Eds.), The on-line study of sentence comprehension: Eyetracking, ERP, and beyond (pp. 271–308). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Peeters, D., Vanlangendonck, F., Rueschemeyer, S.-A., & Dijkstra, T. (2019). Activation of the language control network in bilingual visual word recognition. Cortex, 111, 63–73.Google Scholar
van Assche, E., Duyck, W., & Hartsuiker, R. J. (2012). Bilingual word recognition in a sentence context. Frontiers in psychology, 3, 174.Google Scholar
van Assche, E., Duyck, W., & Hartsuiker, R. J. (2016). Context effects in bilingual sentence processing: Task specificity. In Heredia, R. R., Altarriba, J., & Cieślicka, A. B. (Eds.), Methods in bilingual reading comprehension research (pp. 11–31). New York: Springer.Google Scholar

References

Ardal, S., Donald, M. W., Meuter, R., Muldrew, S., & Luce, M. (1990). Brain responses to semantic incongruity in bilinguals. Brain and Language, 39(2), 187–205.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Arzouan, Y., Goldstein, A., & Faust, M. (2007). Brainwaves are stethoscopes: ERP correlates of novel metaphor comprehension. Brain Research, 1160, 69–81.Google Scholar
Bambini, V., Bertini, C., Schaeken, W., Stella, A., & Di Russo, F. (2016). Disentangling metaphor from context: An ERP study. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 559.Google Scholar
Bambini, V., Canal, P., Resta, D., & Grimaldi, M. (2019). Time course and neurophysiological underpinnings of metaphor in literary context. Discourse Processes, 56(1), 77–97.Google Scholar
Bastiaansen, M. C., & Hagoort, P. (2006). Oscillatory neuronal dynamics during language comprehension. Progress in Brain Research, 159, 179–196.Google Scholar
Bastiaansen, M. C., Linden, M. V. D., Keurs, M. T., Dijkstra, T., & Hagoort, P. (2005). Theta responses are involved in lexical: Semantic retrieval during language processing. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17(3), 530–541.Google Scholar
Bastiaansen, M. C., Oostenveld, R., Jensen, O., & Hagoort, P. (2008). I see what you mean: Theta power increases are involved in the retrieval of lexical semantic information. Brain and Language, 106(1), 15–28.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bastiaansen, M. C., van Berkum, J. J., & Hagoort, P. (2002). Event-related theta power increases in the human EEG during online sentence processing. Neuroscience Letters, 323(1), 13–16.Google Scholar
Bentin, S., McCarthy, G., & Wood, C. C. (1985). Event-related potentials, lexical decision and semantic priming. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 60(4), 343–355. https://doi.org/10.1016/0013-4694(85)90008-2Google Scholar
Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I., & Schlesewsky, M. (2008). An alternative perspective on “semantic P600” effects in language comprehension. Brain Research Reviews, 59(1), 55–73.Google Scholar
Braunstein, V., Ischebeck, A., Brunner, C., Grabner, R. H., Stamenov, M., & Neuper, C. (2012). Investigating the influence of proficiency on semantic processing in bilinguals: An ERP and ERD/S analysis. Acta Neurobiologiae Experimentalis, 72(4), 421–438.Google Scholar
Chen, H., Peng, X., & Zhao, Y. (2013). An ERP study on metaphor comprehension in the bilingual brain. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics, 36(4), 505–517. https://doi.org/10.1515/cjal-2013-0034CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coulson, S., & van Petten, C. (2002). Conceptual integration and metaphor: An event-related potential study. Memory and Cognition, 30(6), 958–968.Google Scholar
Davidson, D. J., & Indefrey, P. (2007). An inverse relation between event-related and time–frequency violation responses in sentence processing. Brain Research, 1158, 81–92.Google Scholar
De Bruijn, E. R., Dijkstra, T., Chwilla, D. J., & Schriefers, H. J. (2001). Language context effects on interlingual homograph recognition: evidence from event-related potentials and response times in semantic priming. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 4(2), 155–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dijkstra, T., van Hell, J. G., & Brenders, P. (2015). Sentence context effects in bilingual word recognition: Cognate status, sentence language, and semantic constraint. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 18(4), 597–613.Google Scholar
Dijkstra, T., & van Heuven, W. J. (2002). The architecture of the bilingual word recognition system: From identification to decision. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 5(3), 175–197.Google Scholar
Duñabeitia, J. A., Dimitropoulou, M., Dowens, M. G., Molinaro, N., & Martin, C. (2016). The electrophysiology of the bilingual brain. In Heredia, R. R., Altarriba, J., & Cieślicka, A. B. (Eds.), Methods in Bilingual Reading Comprehension Research (pp. 265–312). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Elston-Güttler, K. E., Gunter, T. C., & Kotz, S. A. (2005). Zooming into L2: Global language context and adjustment affect processing of interlingual homographs in sentences. Cognitive Brain Research, 25(1), 57–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogbrainres.2005.04.007CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Elston-Güttler, K. E., Paulmann, S., & Kotz, S. A. (2005). Who’s in control? Proficiency and L1 influence on L2 processing. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17(10), 1593–1610.Google Scholar
Fabbro, F. (2001). The bilingual brain: Cerebral representation of languages. Brain and Language, 79(2), 211–222.Google Scholar
Foucart, A., Martin, C. D., Moreno, E. M., & Costa, A. (2014). Can bilinguals see it coming? Word anticipation in L2 sentence reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40(5), 1461–1469. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036756Google ScholarPubMed
Friederici, A. D., & Mecklinger, A. (1996). Syntactic parsing as revealed by brain responses: First-pass and second-pass parsing processes. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 25(1), 157–176.Google Scholar
Goldstein, A., Arzouan, Y., & Faust, M. (2012). Killing a novel metaphor and reviving a dead one: ERP correlates of metaphor conventionalization. Brain and Language, 123(2), 137–142.Google Scholar
Hagoort, P., Brown, C., & Groothusen, J. (1993). The syntactic positive shift (SPS) as an ERP measure of syntactic processing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 8(4), 439–483. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690969308407585Google Scholar
Hahne, A. (2001). What’s different in second-language processing? Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 30(3), 251–266.Google Scholar
Hahne, A., & Friederici, A. D. (2001). Processing a second language: Late learners’ comprehension mechanisms as revealed by event-related brain potentials. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 4(2), 123–141. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728901000232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hald, L. A., Bastiaansen, M. C., & Hagoort, P. (2006). EEG theta and gamma responses to semantic violations in online sentence processing. Brain and Language, 96(1), 90–105.Google Scholar
Hald, L. A., Steenbeek-Planting, E. G., & Hagoort, P. (2007). The interaction of discourse context and world knowledge in online sentence comprehension. Evidence from the N400. Brain Research, 1146, 210–218.Google Scholar
Jankowiak, K., & Rataj, K. (2017). The N400 as a window into lexico-semantic processing in bilingualism. Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics, 53(1), 119–156.Google Scholar
Jankowiak, K., Rataj, K., & Naskręcki, R. (2017). To electrify bilingualism: Electrophysiological insights into bilingual metaphor comprehension. PLoS ONE, 12(4), e0175578.Google Scholar
Jouravlev, O., & Jared, D. (2014). Reading Russian–English homographs in sentence contexts: Evidence from ERPs. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 17(1), 153–168.Google Scholar
Kaan, E., Harris, A., Gibson, E., & Holcomb, P. (2000). The P600 as an index of syntactic integration difficulty. Language and Cognitive Processes, 15(2), 159–201.Google Scholar
Kerkhofs, R., Dijkstra, T., Chwilla, D. J., & De Bruijn, E. R. (2006). Testing a model for bilingual semantic priming with interlingual homographs: RT and N400 effects. Brain Research, 1068(1), 170–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khachatryan, E., Camarrone, F., Fias, W., & van Hulle, M. M. (2016). ERP response unveils effect of second language manipulation on first language processing. PLoS ONE, 11(11), e0167194.Google Scholar
Kielar, A., Meltzer, J. A., Moreno, S., Alain, C., & Bialystok, E. (2014). Oscillatory responses to semantic and syntactic violations. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 26(12), 2840–2862. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_00670Google Scholar
Klimesch, W. (1999). EEG alpha and theta oscillations reflect cognitive and memory performance: A review and analysis. Brain Research Reviews, 29(2–3), 169–195.Google Scholar
Kutas, M., & Federmeier, K. D. (2011). Thirty years and counting: Finding meaning in the N400 component of the event-related brain potential (ERP). Annual Review of Psychology, 62(1), 621–647. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.131123CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kutas, M., & Hillyard, S. A. (1980). Reading senseless sentences: Brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity. Science, 207(4427), 203–205.Google Scholar
Kutas, M., & Hillyard, S. A. (1984). Brain potentials during reading reflect word expectancy and semantic association. Nature, 307, 161. https://doi.org/10.1038/307161a0Google Scholar
Kutas, M., & Kluender, R. (1994). What is who violating? A reconsideration of linguistic violations in light of event-related brain potentials. In Heinze, H.-J., Münte, T. F., & Mangun, G. R. (Eds.), Cognitive electrophysiology (pp. 183–210). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Martin, C. D., Thierry, G., Kuipers, J. R., Boutonnet, B., Foucart, A., & Costa, A. (2013). Bilinguals reading in their second language do not predict upcoming words as native readers do. Journal of Memory and Language, 69(4), 574–588.Google Scholar
Moreno, E. M., & Kutas, M. (2005). Processing semantic anomalies in two languages: An electrophysiological exploration in both languages of Spanish–English bilinguals. Cognitive Brain Research, 22(2), 205–220.Google Scholar
Moreno, E. M., Rodríguez-Fornells, A., & Laine, M. (2008). Event-related potentials (ERPs) in the study of bilingual language processing. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 21(6), 477–508.Google Scholar
Moreno, S., Bialystok, E., Wodniecka, Z., & Alain, C. (2010). Conflict resolution in sentence processing by bilinguals. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 23(6), 564–579.Google Scholar
Osterhout, L., Holcomb, P. J., & Swinney, D. A. (1994). Brain potentials elicited by garden-path sentences: Evidence of the application of verb information during parsing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20(4), 786–803. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.20.4.786Google Scholar
Perani, D., & Abutalebi, J. (2005). The neural basis of first and second language processing. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 15(2), 202–206.Google Scholar
Proverbio, A. M., Čok, B., & Zani, A. (2002). Electrophysiological measures of language processing in bilinguals. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 14(7), 994–1017.Google Scholar
Rataj, K., Przekoracka-Krawczyk, A., & van der Lubbe, R. H. (2018). On understanding creative language: The late positive complex and novel metaphor comprehension. Brain Research, 1678, 231–244.Google Scholar
Rueckl, J. G., Paz-Alonso, P. M., Molfese, P. J., Kuo, W.-J., Bick, A., Frost, S. J., … & Duñabeitia, J. A. (2015). Universal brain signature of proficient reading: Evidence from four contrasting languages. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(50), 15510–15515.Google Scholar
Schwartz, A. I., & Kroll, J. F. (2006). Bilingual lexical activation in sentence context. Journal of Memory and Language, 55(2), 197–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steinhauer, K., Drury, J. E., Portner, P., Walenski, M., & Ullman, M. T. (2010). Syntax, concepts, and logic in the temporal dynamics of language comprehension: Evidence from event-related potentials. Neuropsychologia, 48(6), 1525–1542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2010.01.013Google Scholar
van Herten, M., Kolk, H. H., & Chwilla, D. J. (2005). An ERP study of P600 effects elicited by semantic anomalies. Cognitive Brain Research, 22(2), 241–255.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van Heuven, W. J. B., & Dijkstra, T. (2010). Language comprehension in the bilingual brain: fMRI and ERP support for psycholinguistic models. Brain Research Reviews, 64(1), 104–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainresrev.2010.03.002CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weber-Fox, C. M., & Neville, H. J. (1996). Maturational constraints on functional specializations for language processing: ERP and behavioral evidence in bilingual speakers. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 8(3), 231–256.Google Scholar
Wu, Y. J., & Thierry, G. (2010). Investigating bilingual processing: the neglected role of language processing contexts. Frontiers in Psychology, 1, 178.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×