Proper names are linguistic expressions referring to unique entities, such as individual people or places. This sets them apart from other words like common nouns, which refer to generic concepts. And yet, despite both being individual entities, one's closest friend and one's favorite city are intuitively associated with very different pieces of knowledge—face, voice, social relationship, autobiographical experiences for the former, and mostly visual and spatial information for the latter. Neuroimaging research has revealed the existence of both domain-general and domain-specific brain correlates of semantic processing of individual entities; however, it remains unclear how such commonalities and similarities operate over a fine-grained temporal scale. In this work, we tackle this question using EEG and multivariate (time-resolved and searchlight) decoding analyses. We look at when and where we can accurately decode the semantic category of a proper name and whether we can find person- or place-specific effects of familiarity, which is a modality-independent dimension and therefore avoids sensorimotor differences inherent among the two categories. Semantic category can be decoded in a time window and with spatial localization typically associated with lexical semantic processing. Regarding familiarity, our results reveal that it is easier to distinguish patterns of familiarity-related evoked activity for people, as opposed to places, in both early and late time windows. Second, we discover that within the early responses, both domain-general (left posterior-lateral) and domain-specific (right fronto-temporal, only for people) neural patterns can be individuated, suggesting the existence of person-specific processes.

Most studies of conceptual knowledge in the brain focus on a narrow range of concrete conceptual categories, rely on the researchers' intuitions about which object belongs to these categories, and assume a broadly taxonomic organization of knowledge. In this fMRI study, we focus on concepts with a variety of concreteness levels; we use a state of the art lexical resource (WordNet 3.1) as the source for a relatively large number of category distinctions and compare a taxonomic style of organization with a domain-based model (an example domain is Law). Participants mentally simulated situations associated with concepts when cued by text stimuli. Using multivariate pattern analysis, we find evidence that all Taxonomic categories and Domains can be distinguished from fMRI data and also observe a clear concreteness effect: Tools and Locations can be reliably predicted for unseen participants, but less concrete categories (e.g., Attributes , Communications , Events , Social Roles ) can only be reliably discriminated within participants. A second concreteness effect relates to the interaction of Domain and Taxonomic category membership: Domain (e.g., relation to Law vs. Music) can be better predicted for less concrete categories. We repeated the analysis within anatomical regions, observing discrimination between all/most categories in the left mid occipital and left mid temporal gyri, and more specialized discrimination for concrete categories Tool and Location in the left precentral and fusiform gyri, respectively. Highly concrete/abstract Taxonomic categories and Domain were segregated in frontal regions. We conclude that both Taxonomic and Domain class distinctions are relevant for interpreting neural structuring of concrete and abstract concepts.