Skip Nav Destination
Close Modal
Update search
NARROW
Format
Journal
Date
Availability
1-2 of 2
B. Randall
Close
Follow your search
Access your saved searches in your account
Would you like to receive an alert when new items match your search?
Sort by
Journal Articles
Publisher: Journals Gateway
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience (2008) 20 (8): 1381–1389.
Published: 01 August 2008
Abstract
View article
PDF
Here we address the contentious issue of how nouns and verbs are represented in the brain. The co-occurrence of noun and verb deficits with damage to different neural regions has led to the view that they are differentially represented in the brain. Recent neuroimaging evidence and inconsistent lesion–behavior associations challenge this view. We have suggested that nouns and verbs are not differentially represented in the brain, but that different patterns of neural activity are triggered by the different linguistic functions carried by nouns and verbs. We test these claims in a functional magnetic resonance imaging study using homophones—words which function grammatically as nouns or verbs but have the same form and meaning—ensuring that any neural differences reflect differences in grammatical function. Words were presented as single stems and in phrases in which each homophone was preceded by an article to create a noun phrase (NP) or a pronoun to create a verb phrase (VP), thus establishing the word's functional linguistic role. Activity for single-word homophones was not modulated by their frequency of usage as a noun or verb. In contrast, homophones marked as verbs by appearing in VPs elicited greater activity in the left posterior middle temporal gyrus (LpMTG) compared to homophones marked as nouns by occurring in NPs. Neuropsychological patients with grammatical deficits had lesions which overlapped with the greater LpMTG activity found for VPs. These results suggest that nouns and verbs do not invariably activate different neural regions; rather, differential cortical activity depends on the extent to which their different grammatical functions are engaged.
Journal Articles
Publisher: Journals Gateway
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience (2005) 17 (7): 1087–1097.
Published: 01 July 2005
Abstract
View article
PDF
Neuropsychological impairments of English past tense processing inform a key debate in cognitive neuroscience concerning the nature of mental mechanisms. Dual-route accounts claim that regular past tense comprehension deficits reflect a specific impairment of morphological decomposition (e.g., jump + ed), disrupting the automatic comprehension of word meaning accessed via the verb stem (e.g., jump). Single-mechanism accounts claim that the deficits reflect a general phonological impairment that affects perception of regular past tense offsets but which might preserve normal activation of verb semantics. We tested four patients with regular past tense deficits and matched controls, using a paired auditory semantic priming/lexical decision task with three conditions: uninflected verbs (hope/wish), regular past tense primes (blamed/accuse), and irregular past tense primes (shook/tremble). Both groups showed significant priming for verbs with simple morphophonology (uninflected verbs and irregular past tenses) but the patients showed no priming for verbs with complex morphophonology (regular past tenses) in contrast to controls. The findings suggest that the patients are delayed in activating the meaning of verbs if a regular past tense affix is appended, consistent with a dual-route account of their deficit.