Abstract：Syntax-first models and semantic priority are two opposing views in sentence processing theory. This study took N400 and P600 effects as the main analysis objects to explore the cognitive processing mechanism of Chinese sentences with semantic violations, with syntax violations and with both semantic and syntax violations of the "subject (noun) + predicate (verb) + object (noun)" structure without modifiers (referred to as Chinese [S+V+O] simple sentence structure) in the brain. The results of figures showed that semantic violation sentences, syntactic violation sentences, and combined violation sentences all triggered the N400 effect between 300 and 400 ms. Among them, the N400 amplitude of the semantic violation sentence and the syntactic violation sentence were similar, but the N400 amplitude for sentences with both semantic and syntax violations were more negative than the N400 amplitude with only one semantic and sytax violation. Only the semantical violations produced the P600 tendency. The research results indicated that Chinese sentences with the [S+V+O] simple structure might not fit with syntax-first model. The results also showed that the brain response to this sentence structure differs from the EEG amplitude caused by the "ba" sentence and the "bei" sentence. Thus, this research concludes that sentence processing in brain might differ for language types and language structures.
[1] HUANG S J, SU T, HUANG M, et al. Mechanism of linguistic information integration in sentence comprehension[J]. Foreign Language Learning Theory and Practice, 2020(1): 34-40. (in Chinese) 黄邵娟, 苏涛, 黄敏, 等. 句子理解中语言信息的整合加工机制[J]. 外语教学理论与实践, 2020(1): 34-40. [2] FERREIRA F, CLIFTON JR C. The independence of syntactic processing[J]. Journal of Memory and Language, 1986, 25(3): 348-368. [3] FRIEDERICI A D. Towards a neural basis of auditory sentence processing[J]. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2002, 6(2): 78-84. [4] FRIEDERICI A D. The brain basis of language processing: From structure to function[J]. Physiological Reviews, 2011, 91(4): 1357-1392. [5] MACDONALD M C, PEARLMUTTER N J, SEIDENBERG M S. Lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution[J]. Psychological Review, 1994, 101(4): 676-703. [6] TRUESWELL J C, TANENHAUS M K, GARNSEY S M. Semantic influences on parsing: Use of thematic role information in syntactic ambiguity resolution[J]. Journal of Memory and Language, 1994, 33(3): 285-318. [7] YU J, ZHANG Y X. When Chinese semantics meets failed syntax[J]. Neuroreport, 2008, 19(7): 745-749. [8] ZHANG Y X, YU J, BOLAND J E. Semantics does not need a processing license from syntax in reading Chinese[J]. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 2010, 36(3): 765-781. [9] ZHANG Y X, LI P, PIAO Q H, et al. Syntax does not necessarily precede semantics in sentence processing: ERP evidence from Chinese[J]. Brain and Language, 2013, 126(1): 8-19. [10] ZENG T, LI Y X, WU M J. Syntactic and semantic processing of passive BEI sentences in Mandarin Chinese: Evidence from event-related potentials[J]. Neuroreport, 2020, 31(13): 979-984. [11] YANG S Q, JIANG M H. Chinese-English bilinguals' ERP activating effect for English during the mother tongue semantic processing[J]. Journal of Chinese Information Processing, 2016, 30(6): 117-125. (in Chinese) 杨思琴, 江铭虎. 双语者加工汉语母语语义时对英语的ERP激活效应的研究[J]. 中文信息学报, 2016, 30(6): 117-125. [12] RABOVSKY M. Change in a probabilistic representation of meaning can account for N400 effects on articles: A neural network model[J]. Neuropsychologia, 2020, 143: 107466. [13] YANG S Q, XU W Y, JIANG M H, et al. The difference of cognitive processing between phonetic puns and semantic puns in Chinese: An ERP evidence [J]. Journal of Chinese Information Processing, 2020, 34(1): 1-9. (in Chinese) 杨思琴, 徐文玉, 江铭虎, 等. 汉语谐音与语义双关语的认知神经加工差异——ERP证据[J]. 中文信息学报, 2020, 34(1): 1-9. [14] BROUWER H, CROCKER M W. On the proper treatment of the N400 and P600 in language comprehension[J]. Frontiers in Psychology, 2017, 8: 1327. [15] YAO D F, JIANG M H, ABULIZI A, et al. Effects of Chinese sign language modality on processing sentences[J]. Journal of Tsinghua University (Science and Technology), 2016, 56(9): 942-948. (in Chinese) 姚登峰, 江铭虎, 阿布都克力木·阿布力孜. 中国手语模态对句子加工的影响[J]. 清华大学学报(自然科学版), 2016, 56(9): 942-948. [16] HUANG Y L, JIANG M H, GUO Q, et al. N400 amplitude does not recover from disappearance after repetitions despite reinitiated semantic integration difficulty[J]. Neuroreport, 2018, 29(16): 1341-1348. [17] HUANG Y L, JIANG M H, GUO Q, et al. Dissociation of the confounding influences of expectancy and integrative difficulty residing in anomalous sentences in event-related potential studies[J]. Journal of Visualized Experiments, 2019(147): e59436. DOI:doi: 10.3791/59436. [18] ZHANG Q, YANG Y M. Object preference in the processing of relative clause in Chinese: ERP evidence[J]. Linguistic Sciences, 2010, 9(4): 337-353. (in Chinese) 张强, 杨亦鸣. 汉语宾语关系从句加工优势——来自神经电生理学研究的证据[J]. 语言科学, 2010, 9(4): 337-353. [19] SU P, JIANG M H, BAI C. An ERP study on cognitive neural mechanisms of Chinese DE phrases [J]. Journal of Chinese Information Processing, 2018, 32(1): 9-17. (in Chinese) 苏裴, 江铭虎, 白晨. 汉语"的"字短语认知神经机制的ERP研究[J]. 中文信息学报, 2018, 32(1): 9-17. [20] YE Z, LUO Y J, FRIEDERICI A D, et al. Semantic and syntactic processing in Chinese sentence comprehension: Evidence from event-related potentials[J]. Brain Research, 2006, 1071(1): 186-196. [21] WANG X Y, ZHONG Y P, FAN W, et al. The timing of interaction between syntax and semantic in the Chinese sentence processing: Evidence from ERP research [J]. Journal of Psychological Science, 2013, 36(4): 827-831. (in Chinese) 王小艳, 钟毅平, 范伟, 等. 汉语句子加工中句法与语义交互作用的时间进程: 来自ERP的证据[J]. 心理科学, 2013, 36(4): 827-831. [22] YE Z, ZHAN W D, ZHOU X L. The semantic processing of syntactic structure in sentence comprehension: An ERP study[J]. Brain Research, 2007, 1142: 135-145. [23] WANG S P, MO D Y, XIANG M, et al. The time course of semantic and syntactic processing in reading Chinese: Evidence from ERPs[J]. Language and Cognitive Processes, 2013, 28(4): 577-596. [24] ABULIZI A, JIANG M H, YAO D F, et al. Neurocognitive mechanism for morphological complex word processing[J]. Journal of Tsinghua University (Science and Technology), 2017, 57(4): 393-398. (in Chinese) 阿布都克力木·阿布力孜, 江铭虎, 姚登峰, 等. 形态复杂词加工的认知神经机制[J]. 清华大学学报(自然科学版), 2017, 57(4): 393-398. [25] ZHOU X L, JIANG X M, YE Z, et al. Semantic integration processes at different levels of syntactic hierarchy during sentence comprehension: An ERP study[J]. Neuropsychologia, 2010, 48(6): 1551-1562. [26] CHAO Y R. A grammar of spoken Chinese[M]. Berkeley, Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1968. [27] SUN C F, GIVóN T. On the so-called SOV word order in Mandarin Chinese: A quantified text study and its implications[J]. Language, 1985, 61(2): 329-351. [28] ZANG C L, LU Z J, ZHANG Z C. The role of semantic and syntactic information in parafoveal processing during reading[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2019, 27(1): 11-19. (in Chinese) 臧传丽, 鹿子佳, 张志超. 语义和句法信息在副中央凹加工中的作用[J]. 心理科学进展, 2019, 27(1): 11-19. [29] FRIEDERICI A D, STEINHAUER K, FRISCH S. Lexical integration: Sequential effects of syntactic and semantic information[J]. Memory & Cognition, 1999, 27(3): 438-453. [30] HAHNE A, FRIEDERICI A D. Differential task effects on semantic and syntactic processes as revealed by ERPs[J]. Cognitive Brain Research, 2002, 13(3): 339-356.
2022, Vol. 62 
