Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Blog
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • TOPICS
    • Cognition and Behavior
    • Development
    • Disorders of the Nervous System
    • History, Teaching and Public Awareness
    • Integrative Systems
    • Neuronal Excitability
    • Novel Tools and Methods
    • Sensory and Motor Systems
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Editorial Board
    • For the Media
    • Privacy Policy
    • Contact Us
    • Feedback
  • SUBMIT

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
eNeuro
eNeuro

Advanced Search

 

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Blog
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • TOPICS
    • Cognition and Behavior
    • Development
    • Disorders of the Nervous System
    • History, Teaching and Public Awareness
    • Integrative Systems
    • Neuronal Excitability
    • Novel Tools and Methods
    • Sensory and Motor Systems
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Editorial Board
    • For the Media
    • Privacy Policy
    • Contact Us
    • Feedback
  • SUBMIT
PreviousNext
Research ArticleNew Research, Cognition and Behavior

Language in Context: MEG Evidence for Modality-General and -Specific Responses to Reference Resolution

Christian Brodbeck, Laura Gwilliams and Liina Pylkkänen
eNeuro 15 December 2016, 3 (6) ENEURO.0145-16.2016; https://doi.org/10.1523/ENEURO.0145-16.2016
Christian Brodbeck
1Department of Psychology, New York University, New York, NY 10003
3NYU Abu Dhabi Institute, New York University Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Christian Brodbeck
Laura Gwilliams
1Department of Psychology, New York University, New York, NY 10003
3NYU Abu Dhabi Institute, New York University Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Laura Gwilliams
Liina Pylkkänen
1Department of Psychology, New York University, New York, NY 10003
2Department of Linguistics, New York University, New York, NY 10003
3NYU Abu Dhabi Institute, New York University Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Liina Pylkkänen
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Fig. 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Fig. 1.

    Modality-specific and modality-general representations. Possible flow of information between modality-general and modality-specific representations of both linguistic meaning and referents. Information originates at the top in linguistic form information, i.e., written or spoken words. This input triggers retrieval of meanings, which in turn are used to find referents. Some theories suggest the existence of a “semantic hub” that is involved in processing semantic representations regardless of the modality of their content (Patterson et al., 2007), and others suggest that meaning is exclusively represented in modality-specific brain systems (Pulvermuller, 2013). Both of these theories are potentially compatible with a model in which referents are represented exclusively in modality-specific brain systems (blue and red arrows, respectively). This hypothesis would suggest that the “referents” box at the bottom left can be removed from the diagram, since referential processing is constrained to modality-specific representations.

  • Fig. 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Fig. 2.

    Design for auditory referential domains. Time proceeds from left to right, with vertical offset indicating elements that differ between conditions. The arrow indicates the target word for analysis. The upper sequence illustrates a trial in which the target word grunt resolves reference, whereas the lower sequence illustrates a trial in which it does not, and reference is resolved by adding the prepositional phrase in the middle. Below the displays, presentation time of each frame is indicated in milliseconds.

  • Fig. 3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Fig. 3.

    Design for visual referential domains. Time proceeds from left to right, with vertical offset indicating elements that differ between conditions. The arrow indicates the target word for analysis. For both trials with noun targets and trials with adjective targets, the upper sequence illustrates a trial in which the target resolves reference, and the lower sequence illustrates a trial in which reference is resolved later in the sentence. Below the displays, presentation time of each frame is indicated in milliseconds.

  • Fig. 4.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Fig. 4.

    Full-model ANOVA results. The ANOVA analysis revealed a significant spatiotemporal cluster for the main effect of reference resolution in the medial parietal lobe of the left hemisphere, indicating an activity increase associated with reference resolution starting at 415 ms after target word onset. Top left, Anatomical extent of the cluster, shown on a lateral and a medial view of the left hemisphere. Each source that was part of the cluster at any time point is color coded, indicating the sum of F-values over time, i.e., how much that particular source contributed to the cluster’s mass. Top right, The anatomical region included in the test is indicated in blue; the left hemisphere is shown for illustration, but the test also included the corresponding area of the right hemisphere. Bottom, The time course of activation in the ROI defined by the cluster in response to the target words, shown separately for auditory and visual referential domains for illustration purposes. Time 0 ms corresponds to the onset of the visual presentation of the target word. The time course plots indicate within-subject standard errors. The time region covered by the cluster is indicated with gray shading (415–600 ms).

  • Fig. 5.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Fig. 5.

    Test for conjunction of reference resolution in auditory and visual referential domains. Top, Anatomical extent of the cluster, showing for each anatomical source the sum of the t-values over time, i.e., indicating how much each source contributes to the cluster mass statistic (details analogous to Fig. 4). Below, Activation in the ROI defined by the cluster in the different conditions. Left, Schematic depiction of the referential domains for each condition, and a corresponding example target word. Referents are color-coded for clarity of the results only—referents in the visual referential domains that were presented to subjects were always black and white. Middle, Time course of activation in response to the target word presentation in the ROI defined by the spatial extent of the cluster. The time region covered by the cluster is indicated with gray shading. Right, Bar-plots show the average activation for each condition in the spatiotemporal region covered by the cluster. In both time- and bar-plots, variability is indicated with the within-subject standard error.

  • Fig. 6.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Fig. 6.

    Results in auditory cortex. A significant cluster indicated an activation increase when reference was resolved to auditory objects. The time course of activation in the ROI defined by the cluster is plotted separately according to the sequential position of the referent in the auditory domain. For each plot, the relevant position of the referent is indicated in the schematic of the referential domain. Other details are analogous to previous figures.

Back to top

In this issue

eneuro: 3 (6)
eNeuro
Vol. 3, Issue 6
November/December 2016
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Email

Thank you for sharing this eNeuro article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Language in Context: MEG Evidence for Modality-General and -Specific Responses to Reference Resolution
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from eNeuro
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in eNeuro.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
View Full Page PDF
Citation Tools
Language in Context: MEG Evidence for Modality-General and -Specific Responses to Reference Resolution
Christian Brodbeck, Laura Gwilliams, Liina Pylkkänen
eNeuro 15 December 2016, 3 (6) ENEURO.0145-16.2016; DOI: 10.1523/ENEURO.0145-16.2016

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Respond to this article
Share
Language in Context: MEG Evidence for Modality-General and -Specific Responses to Reference Resolution
Christian Brodbeck, Laura Gwilliams, Liina Pylkkänen
eNeuro 15 December 2016, 3 (6) ENEURO.0145-16.2016; DOI: 10.1523/ENEURO.0145-16.2016
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Significance Statement
    • Introduction
    • Materials and methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusions
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
    • Synthesis
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Keywords

  • language comprehension
  • MEG
  • reference
  • situation model
  • visual world

Responses to this article

Respond to this article

Jump to comment:

No eLetters have been published for this article.

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

New Research

  • A Very Fast Time Scale of Human Motor Adaptation: Within Movement Adjustments of Internal Representations during Reaching
  • TrkB Signaling Influences Gene Expression in Cortistatin-Expressing Interneurons
  • Optogenetic Activation of β-Endorphin Terminals in the Medial Preoptic Nucleus Regulates Female Sexual Receptivity
Show more New Research

Cognition and Behavior

  • Is Social Media Use a Blessing or Cure for Motor Function and Skill Acquisition? An Opinion Paper
  • Transcriptional Changes Fade Prior to Long-Term Memory for Sensitization of the Aplysia Siphon-Withdrawal Reflex.
  • Short-Term Perceptual Training Modulates Neural Responses to Deepfake Speech but Does Not Improve Behavioral Discrimination
Show more Cognition and Behavior

Subjects

  • Cognition and Behavior
  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Follow SFN on BlueSky
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Facebook
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on Twitter
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on LinkedIn
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Youtube
  • Follow our RSS feeds

Content

  • Early Release
  • Current Issue
  • Latest Articles
  • Issue Archive
  • Blog
  • Browse by Topic

Information

  • For Authors
  • For the Media

About

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Privacy Notice
  • Contact
  • Feedback
(eNeuro logo)
(SfN logo)

Copyright © 2026 by the Society for Neuroscience.
eNeuro eISSN: 2373-2822

The ideas and opinions expressed in eNeuro do not necessarily reflect those of SfN or the eNeuro Editorial Board. Publication of an advertisement or other product mention in eNeuro should not be construed as an endorsement of the manufacturer’s claims. SfN does not assume any responsibility for any injury and/or damage to persons or property arising from or related to any use of any material contained in eNeuro.