Seminar in Neurolinguistics


About \| Graduate \| Undergraduate \| Contact \| People \| Events \| Working Papers \| Site Map \| Home
G61.3710: Seminar in Neurolinguistics (31465) Liina Pylkkänen (liina.pylkkanen@nyu.edu) Wednesday 4:55PM-7:35PM 719 Broadway, 433 (Linguistics Department Conference Room) This is an advanced introduction to the cognitive neuroscience of human language. Lectures and discussion on central topics in the neurobiology of language processing and on foundational questions having to do with the relationship between experimental and theoretical approaches to the study of language. Literature and ongoing research on auditory perception, lexical access and syntactic/semantic processing are discussed. In addition to surveying existing results, the course is heavily focused on discussing what kinds of questions about language processing and representation can be investigated with the currently available neurobiological methods/knowledge. Basic neuroanatomy, functional imaging techniques and behavioral measures of cognition are introduced. Emphasis is on electrophysiological methods (MEG, EEG) over neuroimaging (fMRI, PET) although studies involving the latter are also discussed. ABSTRACTS of three psycholinguistics experiments that were conducted as final projects for this seminar in Spring 2003. OFFICE HOURS: TBA and by appointment REQUIREMENTS (a) Readings Come to class having done the obligatory readings. Choose a class in which you'll present a paper. Starred readings are suggested for presentations, but you may also choose some other paper. (a) Projects Projects may be of three types: Experimental. Involves designing and scripting a behavioral or an MEG experiment, runnign a few pilot subjects, and doing a short write-up of this. Exploring top-down syntax. Investigate some syntactic phenomenon in a top-down fashion. Critical review paper of some set of experimental results. DEADLINES By Jan 31, send me email indicating what paper you'd like to present class. By Feb 26, make an appointment with me to discuss your project. Note: I will be out of the country Feb 6-17. March 7: One-page project proposals are due. April 2: A draft of your experimental materials is due (email me an excel sheet). This should be as complete as possible. I'll get the materials back to you within a few days with feedback. April 11: Final experimental materials are due. Email me the revised excel-sheet and your updated project proposal where the Materials and Procedure sections of your Methods are now written up and your experimental materials appear as an Appendix. Make sure you've addressed the specific as well as the the general comments about project proposals handed out after the first draft was due. How to analyze your data. April 30: Powerpoint presentation on your results so far. May 11: Papers are due. LABS Labs will be scheduled for those registered participants who will be engaging in an experimental project. Nature of the labs will depend on the nature of the projects. SCHEDULE AND READINGS Bolded readings are obligatory. Starred readings are suggested student presentations. If you'd like to present some other paper on the list, let me know. Jan 22 INTRO: LINGUISTICS, PSYCHOLINGUISTICS AND NEUROLINGUISTICS Marantz, A, Miyashita, Y & O’Neil, W. 2000. Introduction: Mind Articulation. In A Marantz et al., eds., Image, Language, Brain, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1-9. Brown, C. & P. Hagoort (eds). 1999. The Neurocognition of Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [chapter 1] Chomsky, N. 2000. Linguistics and Brain Science. In A Marantz et al., eds., Image, Language, Brain, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 13-28. Jan 29 QUESTIONS AND METHODS Brown, C. & P. Hagoort (eds). 1999. The Neurocognition of Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [chapter 2] Dronkers, N. 1996. A new brain region for coordinating speech articulation. Nature, 384, 159-161. Stromswold, K, Caplan, D, Alpert, N, & Rauch, S. 1996. Localization of Syntactic Comprehension by Positron Emission Tomography. Brain and Language, 52, 452-473. Embick, D, Marantz, A, Miyashita, Y, O'Neil,W, & Sakai, K. 2000. A Syntactic Specialization for Broca's Area. PNAS 97(11), 6150-6154. Neville, H, Nicol, J, et al. 1991. Syntactically Based Sentence Processing Classes: Evidence from Event-Related Brain Potentials. J of Cog Neuro, 3 (2), 151-165. Feb 5 VISIT TO THE MEG LAB AT BELLEVUE HOSPITAL CENTER - Class will be held at Bellevue from 4:55-6. - Demo of an MEG recording of brain activity 6-7:30pm. Hari, R., S. Levänen, & T. Raij. 2000. Timing of human cortical functions during cognition: role of MEG. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 455-462. Phillips, C., A. Marantz, M. McGinnis et al. 1995. Brain mechanisms of speech perception: a preliminary report . MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, 26, 153-191. FEB 12 APHASIOLOGY AND LANGUAGE. NEUROANATOMY. Guest lecturer: Karen Froud, MIT. (LP gone.) This class has been rescheduled for April 23. FEB 19 SPEECH PERCEPTION: MODELS, AUDITORY EVOKED POTENTIALS/FIELDS Guest lecturer: Nina Kazanina, UMD. Cutler, A. Clifton, C. Comprehending spoken language: a blueprint of the listener. In Brown, C. & P. Hagoort (eds). 1999. The Neurocognition of Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [chapter 5] Hickok, G. and Poeppel, D. 2000. Towards a Functional Anatomy of Speech Perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 4:131-138. Phillips, C. 2001. Levels of representation in the electrophysiology of speech processing. Cognitive Science, 25, 711-731. Roberts, TPLR, Ferrari, P., Stufflebeam, S., Poeppel, D. (2000). Latency of the auditory evoked neuromagnetic field components:stimulus dependence and insights towards perception. J Clinical Neurophysiology 17: 114-129. * Phillips, C., Pellathy, T., Marantz, A., Yellin, E., Wexler, K., Poeppel, D., McGinnis, M. and Roberts, TPL (2000). Auditory Cortex Accesses Phonological Categories: An MEG Mismatch Study. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 12: 1038-1055. FEB 26 LEXICAL ACCESS: ELECTROPHYSIOLOGICAL INDICES OF SOUND AND MEANING ACTIVATION Presenter: Machteld Price, C, & van Turennout, M. 1999. The neural architecture underlying the processing of written and spoken word forms. In C M Brown & P Hagoort, eds., The Neurocognition of Language, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 211-240 Rastle, K., Davis, M., Marslen-Wilson, W., & Tyler, L.K. (2000). Morphological and semantic effects in visual word recognition: A time course study. Language and Cognitive Processes, 15, 507-538. Kutas, M. and Federmeier, K. D. (2000) Electrophysiology reveals semantic memory use in language comprehension, Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4: 12, 463-469. Kutas, M. and Hillyard, S.A. (1980) Reading senseless sentences: brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity. Science, 207(4427), 203-205. Embick, D, et al., 2001. A magnetoencephalographic component whose latency reflects lexical frequency. Cognitive Brain Research 10, 345–348 * Helenius, P, Salmelin, E, et al. 1998. Distinct time courses of word and context comprehension in the left temporal cortex. Brain, 121, 1133-1142. Pylkkänen, L. et al. 2002. Neuromagnetic evidence for the timing of lexical activation: an MEG component sensitive to phonotactic probability but not to neighborhood density. Brain and Language 81, 666-678. Pylkkänen, L. and Marantz, A. 2003. Using MEG to decompose the N400. Submitted. Radeau M, Besson M, Fonteneau E, Castro SL. Semantic, repetition and rime priming between spoken words: behavioral and electrophysiological evidence. Biol Psychol. 1998 Jun;48(2):183-204. MARCH 5 LEXICAL ACCESS: INHIBITORY MECHANISMS AND THE NATURE OF LEXICAL REPRESENTATIONS Presenter: Tom Seidenberg, MS, & Gonnerman, LM. 2000. Explaining derivational morphology as the convergence of codes. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4 (3) 353-361. * Allen, M., & Badecker, W. 1999. Stem homograph inhibition and stem allomorphy: Representing and processing inflected forms in a multilevel lexical system. Journal of Memory and Language, 41, 105–123. Pylkkänen, L., Stringfellow, A., Marantz. A 2002. Inhibition and Competition in Word Recognition: MEG Evidence. Submitted. R. Schreuder and R. H. Baayen , How complex simplex words can be. Journal of Memory and Language 37 (1997), pp. 118–139. Pylkkänen, L. Feintuch, S., Hopkins, E. Marantz, A. 2002. Neural Correlates of the Effects of Morphological Family Frequency and Family Size: an MEG Study. Submitted. Klein, D. E., & Murphy, G. L. (2001). The representation of polysemous words. Journal of Memory and Language, 45, 259-282. MARCH 12 SYNTAX: THE PARSER AND GRAMMAR Presenter: Lisa Townsend, David J., and Thomas G. Bever (2001) Sentence Comprehension: The Integration of Habits and Rules. MIT Press. Chapter 1. Gibson, E. 1998. Linguistic complexity: locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition, 68, 1-76. Gordon, P.C., Hendrick, R., & Levine, W.H. (2002). Memory-load interference in syntactic processing. Psychological Science, 13, 425-430. Friederici AD. The time course of syntactic activation during language processing: a model based on neuropsychological and neurophysiological data. Brain Lang 1995 Sep;50(3):259-81. Colin Phillips. 2003. Linear Order and Constituency, Linguistic Inquiry 34:1. 45pp. Extra: PowerPoint slides illustrating incremental structure building: http://www.ling.umd.edu/colin/research/papers/phillips_constituency.ppt Richards, N. 1999. Dependency Formation and Directionality of Tree Construction, in MITWPL 34: Papers on Morphology and Syntax, Cycle Two, edited by Vivian Lin, Cornelia Krause, Benjamin Bruening, and Karlos Arregi. Fong, S. 2002. Computation with probes and goals: a parsing perspective. Ms. MARCH 19 SPRING BREAK* MARCH 26 SYNTAX: LOCALIZATION Presenter: Ken *Caplan, D., N. Alpert & G. Waters. 1998. Effects of syntactic structure and propositional number on patterns of regional cerebral blood flow. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 10, 541-552. Ben-Shachar, M., Hendler, T., Kahn, I., Ben-Bashat, D. & Grodzinsky, Y. The Neural Reality of Syntactic Transformations: Evidence from fMRI. Psychological Science, In Press. Sakai K, Noguchi Y, Takeuchi T, Watanabe E. Selective Priming of Syntactic Processing by Event-Related Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation of Broca's Area. Neuron. 2002; 35(6): 1177. APR 2 VISIT TO THE NEW FMRI FACILITY AT THE NYU CENTER FOR NEURAL SCIENCE. Prof. Souheil Inati from the Center for Neural Science and Department of Psychology, NYU, will give us an introduction to fMRI and a demo of the lab. APR 9 SYNTACTIC AND SEMANTIC COMPLEXITY: BEHAVIORAL AND ELECTROPHYSIOLOGICAL REFLECTIONS Presenter: Laura Hagoort, P. et al. 1999. The neurocognition of syntactic processing. In C M Brown & P Hagoort, eds., The Neurocognition of Language, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 273-316. Beretta, A., C. Schmitt, et al. (2001). "The effects of scrambling on Spanish and Korean agrammatic interpretation: why linear models fail and structural models survive." Brain and language. 79(3): 407-25. * Kaan, E. et al. 2000. The P600 as an index of syntactic integration difficultly. Language and Cognitive Processes, 15, 159-201. Featherston, S., Gross, M. Münte, T. F. and H. Clahsen, 2000. Brain Potentials in the Processing of Complex Sentences: An ERP Study of Control and Raising Constructions Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, Vol. 29, No. 2. Traxler, M., Pickering, M., & McElree, B. (2002). Coercion in sentence processing: Evidence from eye-movements and self-paced reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 4, 530-547. McElree, B., Traxler, M., Pickering, M., Seely, R, & Jackendoff, R. (2001). Reading time evidence for enriched composition. Cognition, 78, B17-B25. Gennari, S. and Poeppel, D. 2002 Processing correlates of lexical semantic complexity. In Press, Cognition. APR 23 LINGUISTIC REPRESENTATION AND APHASIA. Guest lecturer: Dr. Karen Froud . Fromkin, V. A. (1997). Some thoughts about the brain/mind/language interface, Lingua 100, 3-27. PLEASE READ (at least) PAGES 8-16. Finocchiaro, C. (2002). Sensitivity to the verb agentive feature: the case of an aphasic subject, Journal of Neurolinguistics 15, 433-466. Froud, K. (1998). Aphasic evidence for the syntactic determination of unaccusativity. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 10, 1-18. *Thompson, C. K. (2003). Unaccusative verb production in agrammatic aphasia: the argument structure complexity hypothesis. Journal of Neurolinguistics* 16, 151-167. APR 25, FRI, 1-3pm (notice unusual time!) DEVELOPMENTAL DISORDERS: WILLIAMS SYNDROME AND SLI Presenter: Oana** Clahsen H, Almazan M. 1998. Syntax and morphology in Williams syndrome. Cognition 1998 Sep;68(3):167-98. Zukowski, A. Uncovering grammatical competence in children with Williams Syndrome. Ph.D. Dissertation, Boston University. Clark MG, Rosen GD, Tallal P, Fitch RH. 2000. Impaired processing of complex auditory stimuli in rats with induced cerebrocortical microgyria: An animal model of developmental language disabilities. J Cogn Neurosci 2000 Sep;12(5):828-39. Rice ML, Wexler K, Marquis J, Hershberger S. 2000. Acquisition of irregular past tense by children with specific language impairment . J Speech Lang Hear Res 2000 Oct;43(5):1126-45. Rice ML, Wexler K, Redmond SM. 1999. Grammaticality judgements of an extended optional infinitive grammar: evidence from English-speaking children with specific language impairment. J Speech Lang Hear Res 1999 Aug;42(4):943-61. Watkins KE, Dronkers NF, Vargha-Khadem F. Behavioural analysis of an inherited speech and language disorder: comparison with acquired aphasia. Brain; a journal of neurology. 2002; 125(Pt) 3: 452-64. Watkins KE, Vargha-Khadem F, Ashburner J, Passingham RE, Connelly A, Friston KJ, et al. MRI analysis of an inherited speech and language disorder: structural brain abnormalities. Brain; a journal of neurology. 2002; 125(Pt) 3: 465-78. APR 30 STUDENT PRESENTATIONS* Machteld van Rijsingen & Eytan Zweig: Morphological Transparency and Reaction Times in Lexical Decision Oana Ciucivara & Laura Dorfman: Processing Correlates of Aspectual Classes of Verbs Thomas Leu & Lisa Levinson: RT Effects of θ-ambiguity in Double Object Constructions Followed by LabBeer!!!!

NYU \| Graduate School \| Department of Linguistics Home \| Resources
Last updated June 14, 2002


About \| Graduate \| Undergraduate \| Contact \| People \| Events \| Working Papers \| Site Map \| Home
G61.3710: Seminar in Neurolinguistics (31465) Liina Pylkkänen (liina.pylkkanen@nyu.edu) Wednesday 4:55PM-7:35PM 719 Broadway, 433 (Linguistics Department Conference Room) This is an advanced introduction to the cognitive neuroscience of human language. Lectures and discussion on central topics in the neurobiology of language processing and on foundational questions having to do with the relationship between experimental and theoretical approaches to the study of language. Literature and ongoing research on auditory perception, lexical access and syntactic/semantic processing are discussed. In addition to surveying existing results, the course is heavily focused on discussing what kinds of questions about language processing and representation can be investigated with the currently available neurobiological methods/knowledge. Basic neuroanatomy, functional imaging techniques and behavioral measures of cognition are introduced. Emphasis is on electrophysiological methods (MEG, EEG) over neuroimaging (fMRI, PET) although studies involving the latter are also discussed. ABSTRACTS of three psycholinguistics experiments that were conducted as final projects for this seminar in Spring 2003. OFFICE HOURS: TBA and by appointment REQUIREMENTS (a) Readings Come to class having done the obligatory readings. Choose a class in which you'll present a paper. Starred readings are suggested for presentations, but you may also choose some other paper. (a) Projects Projects may be of three types: Experimental. Involves designing and scripting a behavioral or an MEG experiment, runnign a few pilot subjects, and doing a short write-up of this. Exploring top-down syntax. Investigate some syntactic phenomenon in a top-down fashion. Critical review paper of some set of experimental results. DEADLINES By Jan 31, send me email indicating what paper you'd like to present class. By Feb 26, make an appointment with me to discuss your project. Note: I will be out of the country Feb 6-17. March 7: One-page project proposals are due. April 2: A draft of your experimental materials is due (email me an excel sheet). This should be as complete as possible. I'll get the materials back to you within a few days with feedback. April 11: Final experimental materials are due. Email me the revised excel-sheet and your updated project proposal where the Materials and Procedure sections of your Methods are now written up and your experimental materials appear as an Appendix. Make sure you've addressed the specific as well as the the general comments about project proposals handed out after the first draft was due. How to analyze your data. April 30: Powerpoint presentation on your results so far. May 11: Papers are due. LABS Labs will be scheduled for those registered participants who will be engaging in an experimental project. Nature of the labs will depend on the nature of the projects. SCHEDULE AND READINGS Bolded readings are obligatory. Starred readings are suggested student presentations. If you'd like to present some other paper on the list, let me know. Jan 22 INTRO: LINGUISTICS, PSYCHOLINGUISTICS AND NEUROLINGUISTICS Marantz, A, Miyashita, Y & O’Neil, W. 2000. Introduction: Mind Articulation. In A Marantz et al., eds., Image, Language, Brain, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1-9. Brown, C. & P. Hagoort (eds). 1999. The Neurocognition of Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [chapter 1] Chomsky, N. 2000. Linguistics and Brain Science. In A Marantz et al., eds., Image, Language, Brain, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 13-28. Jan 29 QUESTIONS AND METHODS Brown, C. & P. Hagoort (eds). 1999. The Neurocognition of Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [chapter 2] Dronkers, N. 1996. A new brain region for coordinating speech articulation. Nature, 384, 159-161. Stromswold, K, Caplan, D, Alpert, N, & Rauch, S. 1996. Localization of Syntactic Comprehension by Positron Emission Tomography. Brain and Language, 52, 452-473. Embick, D, Marantz, A, Miyashita, Y, O'Neil,W, & Sakai, K. 2000. A Syntactic Specialization for Broca's Area. PNAS 97(11), 6150-6154. Neville, H, Nicol, J, et al. 1991. Syntactically Based Sentence Processing Classes: Evidence from Event-Related Brain Potentials. J of Cog Neuro, 3 (2), 151-165. Feb 5 VISIT TO THE MEG LAB AT BELLEVUE HOSPITAL CENTER - Class will be held at Bellevue from 4:55-6. - Demo of an MEG recording of brain activity 6-7:30pm. Hari, R., S. Levänen, & T. Raij. 2000. Timing of human cortical functions during cognition: role of MEG. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 455-462. Phillips, C., A. Marantz, M. McGinnis et al. 1995. Brain mechanisms of speech perception: a preliminary report . MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, 26, 153-191. FEB 12 APHASIOLOGY AND LANGUAGE. NEUROANATOMY. Guest lecturer: Karen Froud, MIT. (LP gone.) This class has been rescheduled for April 23. FEB 19 SPEECH PERCEPTION: MODELS, AUDITORY EVOKED POTENTIALS/FIELDS Guest lecturer: Nina Kazanina, UMD. Cutler, A. Clifton, C. Comprehending spoken language: a blueprint of the listener. In Brown, C. & P. Hagoort (eds). 1999. The Neurocognition of Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [chapter 5] Hickok, G. and Poeppel, D. 2000. Towards a Functional Anatomy of Speech Perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 4:131-138. Phillips, C. 2001. Levels of representation in the electrophysiology of speech processing. Cognitive Science, 25, 711-731. Roberts, TPLR, Ferrari, P., Stufflebeam, S., Poeppel, D. (2000). Latency of the auditory evoked neuromagnetic field components:stimulus dependence and insights towards perception. J Clinical Neurophysiology 17: 114-129. * Phillips, C., Pellathy, T., Marantz, A., Yellin, E., Wexler, K., Poeppel, D., McGinnis, M. and Roberts, TPL (2000). Auditory Cortex Accesses Phonological Categories: An MEG Mismatch Study. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 12: 1038-1055. FEB 26 LEXICAL ACCESS: ELECTROPHYSIOLOGICAL INDICES OF SOUND AND MEANING ACTIVATION Presenter: Machteld Price, C, & van Turennout, M. 1999. The neural architecture underlying the processing of written and spoken word forms. In C M Brown & P Hagoort, eds., The Neurocognition of Language, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 211-240 Rastle, K., Davis, M., Marslen-Wilson, W., & Tyler, L.K. (2000). Morphological and semantic effects in visual word recognition: A time course study. Language and Cognitive Processes, 15, 507-538. Kutas, M. and Federmeier, K. D. (2000) Electrophysiology reveals semantic memory use in language comprehension, Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4: 12, 463-469. Kutas, M. and Hillyard, S.A. (1980) Reading senseless sentences: brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity. Science, 207(4427), 203-205. Embick, D, et al., 2001. A magnetoencephalographic component whose latency reflects lexical frequency. Cognitive Brain Research 10, 345–348 * Helenius, P, Salmelin, E, et al. 1998. Distinct time courses of word and context comprehension in the left temporal cortex. Brain, 121, 1133-1142. Pylkkänen, L. et al. 2002. Neuromagnetic evidence for the timing of lexical activation: an MEG component sensitive to phonotactic probability but not to neighborhood density. Brain and Language 81, 666-678. Pylkkänen, L. and Marantz, A. 2003. Using MEG to decompose the N400. Submitted. Radeau M, Besson M, Fonteneau E, Castro SL. Semantic, repetition and rime priming between spoken words: behavioral and electrophysiological evidence. Biol Psychol. 1998 Jun;48(2):183-204. MARCH 5 LEXICAL ACCESS: INHIBITORY MECHANISMS AND THE NATURE OF LEXICAL REPRESENTATIONS Presenter: Tom Seidenberg, MS, & Gonnerman, LM. 2000. Explaining derivational morphology as the convergence of codes. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4 (3) 353-361. * Allen, M., & Badecker, W. 1999. Stem homograph inhibition and stem allomorphy: Representing and processing inflected forms in a multilevel lexical system. Journal of Memory and Language, 41, 105–123. Pylkkänen, L., Stringfellow, A., Marantz. A 2002. Inhibition and Competition in Word Recognition: MEG Evidence. Submitted. R. Schreuder and R. H. Baayen , How complex simplex words can be. Journal of Memory and Language 37 (1997), pp. 118–139. Pylkkänen, L. Feintuch, S., Hopkins, E. Marantz, A. 2002. Neural Correlates of the Effects of Morphological Family Frequency and Family Size: an MEG Study. Submitted. Klein, D. E., & Murphy, G. L. (2001). The representation of polysemous words. Journal of Memory and Language, 45, 259-282. MARCH 12 SYNTAX: THE PARSER AND GRAMMAR Presenter: Lisa Townsend, David J., and Thomas G. Bever (2001) Sentence Comprehension: The Integration of Habits and Rules. MIT Press. Chapter 1. Gibson, E. 1998. Linguistic complexity: locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition, 68, 1-76. Gordon, P.C., Hendrick, R., & Levine, W.H. (2002). Memory-load interference in syntactic processing. Psychological Science, 13, 425-430. Friederici AD. The time course of syntactic activation during language processing: a model based on neuropsychological and neurophysiological data. Brain Lang 1995 Sep;50(3):259-81. Colin Phillips. 2003. Linear Order and Constituency, Linguistic Inquiry 34:1. 45pp. Extra: PowerPoint slides illustrating incremental structure building: http://www.ling.umd.edu/colin/research/papers/phillips_constituency.ppt Richards, N. 1999. Dependency Formation and Directionality of Tree Construction, in MITWPL 34: Papers on Morphology and Syntax, Cycle Two, edited by Vivian Lin, Cornelia Krause, Benjamin Bruening, and Karlos Arregi. Fong, S. 2002. Computation with probes and goals: a parsing perspective. Ms. MARCH 19 SPRING BREAK* MARCH 26 SYNTAX: LOCALIZATION Presenter: Ken *Caplan, D., N. Alpert & G. Waters. 1998. Effects of syntactic structure and propositional number on patterns of regional cerebral blood flow. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 10, 541-552. Ben-Shachar, M., Hendler, T., Kahn, I., Ben-Bashat, D. & Grodzinsky, Y. The Neural Reality of Syntactic Transformations: Evidence from fMRI. Psychological Science, In Press. Sakai K, Noguchi Y, Takeuchi T, Watanabe E. Selective Priming of Syntactic Processing by Event-Related Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation of Broca's Area. Neuron. 2002; 35(6): 1177. APR 2 VISIT TO THE NEW FMRI FACILITY AT THE NYU CENTER FOR NEURAL SCIENCE. Prof. Souheil Inati from the Center for Neural Science and Department of Psychology, NYU, will give us an introduction to fMRI and a demo of the lab. APR 9 SYNTACTIC AND SEMANTIC COMPLEXITY: BEHAVIORAL AND ELECTROPHYSIOLOGICAL REFLECTIONS Presenter: Laura Hagoort, P. et al. 1999. The neurocognition of syntactic processing. In C M Brown & P Hagoort, eds., The Neurocognition of Language, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 273-316. Beretta, A., C. Schmitt, et al. (2001). "The effects of scrambling on Spanish and Korean agrammatic interpretation: why linear models fail and structural models survive." Brain and language. 79(3): 407-25. * Kaan, E. et al. 2000. The P600 as an index of syntactic integration difficultly. Language and Cognitive Processes, 15, 159-201. Featherston, S., Gross, M. Münte, T. F. and H. Clahsen, 2000. Brain Potentials in the Processing of Complex Sentences: An ERP Study of Control and Raising Constructions Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, Vol. 29, No. 2. Traxler, M., Pickering, M., & McElree, B. (2002). Coercion in sentence processing: Evidence from eye-movements and self-paced reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 4, 530-547. McElree, B., Traxler, M., Pickering, M., Seely, R, & Jackendoff, R. (2001). Reading time evidence for enriched composition. Cognition, 78, B17-B25. Gennari, S. and Poeppel, D. 2002 Processing correlates of lexical semantic complexity. In Press, Cognition. APR 23 LINGUISTIC REPRESENTATION AND APHASIA. Guest lecturer: Dr. Karen Froud . Fromkin, V. A. (1997). Some thoughts about the brain/mind/language interface, Lingua 100, 3-27. PLEASE READ (at least) PAGES 8-16. Finocchiaro, C. (2002). Sensitivity to the verb agentive feature: the case of an aphasic subject, Journal of Neurolinguistics 15, 433-466. Froud, K. (1998). Aphasic evidence for the syntactic determination of unaccusativity. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 10, 1-18. *Thompson, C. K. (2003). Unaccusative verb production in agrammatic aphasia: the argument structure complexity hypothesis. Journal of Neurolinguistics* 16, 151-167. APR 25, FRI, 1-3pm (notice unusual time!) DEVELOPMENTAL DISORDERS: WILLIAMS SYNDROME AND SLI Presenter: Oana** Clahsen H, Almazan M. 1998. Syntax and morphology in Williams syndrome. Cognition 1998 Sep;68(3):167-98. Zukowski, A. Uncovering grammatical competence in children with Williams Syndrome. Ph.D. Dissertation, Boston University. Clark MG, Rosen GD, Tallal P, Fitch RH. 2000. Impaired processing of complex auditory stimuli in rats with induced cerebrocortical microgyria: An animal model of developmental language disabilities. J Cogn Neurosci 2000 Sep;12(5):828-39. Rice ML, Wexler K, Marquis J, Hershberger S. 2000. Acquisition of irregular past tense by children with specific language impairment . J Speech Lang Hear Res 2000 Oct;43(5):1126-45. Rice ML, Wexler K, Redmond SM. 1999. Grammaticality judgements of an extended optional infinitive grammar: evidence from English-speaking children with specific language impairment. J Speech Lang Hear Res 1999 Aug;42(4):943-61. Watkins KE, Dronkers NF, Vargha-Khadem F. Behavioural analysis of an inherited speech and language disorder: comparison with acquired aphasia. Brain; a journal of neurology. 2002; 125(Pt) 3: 452-64. Watkins KE, Vargha-Khadem F, Ashburner J, Passingham RE, Connelly A, Friston KJ, et al. MRI analysis of an inherited speech and language disorder: structural brain abnormalities. Brain; a journal of neurology. 2002; 125(Pt) 3: 465-78. APR 30 STUDENT PRESENTATIONS* Machteld van Rijsingen & Eytan Zweig: Morphological Transparency and Reaction Times in Lexical Decision Oana Ciucivara & Laura Dorfman: Processing Correlates of Aspectual Classes of Verbs Thomas Leu & Lisa Levinson: RT Effects of θ-ambiguity in Double Object Constructions Followed by LabBeer!!!!

NYU \| Graduate School \| Department of Linguistics Home \| Resources
Last updated June 14, 2002

G61.3710: Seminar in Neurolinguistics (31465)