Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A review on the cognitive function of information structure during language comprehension

  • Review Article
  • Published:
Cognitive Neurodynamics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

During communication, information structure can be used to highlight the most relevant piece of information, so that sufficient amount of attention can be allocated to the most important information. This paper aims to review the cognitive function of information structure during language comprehension from a neurocognitve perspective. First, we gave a brief introduction to the concept of information structure that has been studied mostly in linguistic field. Then we introduced recent studies on information structure using electrophysiological and neuroimaging techniques. After that, we discussed the relationship between attention and language processing more generally. Finally, we discussed potential directions for future studies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Al Moubayed S, Beskow J (2009) Effects of visual prominence cues on speech intelligibility. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the international conference on auditory visual speech processing AVSP

  • Alibali MW, Heath DC, Myers HJ (2001) Effects of visibility between speaker and listener on gesture production: some gestures are meant to be seen. J Mem Lang 44(2):169–188. doi:10.1006/jmla.2000.2752

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bastiaansen MC, Van Der Linden M, Ter Keurs M, Dijkstra T, Hagoort P (2005) Theta responses are involved in lexical—semantic retrieval during language processing. J Cogn Neurosci 17(3):530–541

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bastiaansen M, Oostenveld R, Jensen O, Hagoort P (2008) I see what you mean: theta power increases are involved in the retrieval of lexical semantic information. Brain Lang 106(1):15–28

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bialystok E (1999) Cognitive complexity and attentional control in the bilingual mind. Child Dev 70(3):636–644

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bialystok E, Viswanathan M (2009) Components of executive control with advantages for bilingual children in two cultures. Cognition 112(3):494–500. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2009.06.014

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Birch S, Clifton C (1995) Focus, accent, and argument structure: effects on language comprehension. Lang Speech 38(4):365–391. doi:10.1177/002383099503800403

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bock JK, Mazzella JR (1983) Intonational marking of given and new information: some consequences for comprehension. Mem Cogn 11(1):64–76

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bögels S, Schriefers H, Vonk W, Chwilla DJ (2011) Pitch accents in context: how listeners process accentuation in referential communication. Neuropsychologia 49(7):2022–2036. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2011.03.032

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bredart S, Docquier M (1989) The Moses illusion: a follow-up on the focalization effect. Curr Psychol Cogn 9:357–362

    Google Scholar 

  • Bredart S, Modolo K (1988) Moses strikes again: focalization effect on a semantic illusion. Acta Psychol 67(2):135–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen L, Li X, Yang Y (2012) Focus, newness and their combination: processing of information structure in discourse. PLoS One 7(8):e42533

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chen L, Wang L, Yang Y (2014) Distinguish between focus and newness: an ERP study. J Neurolinguistics 31:28–41. doi:10.1016/j.jneuroling.2014.06.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky N (1965) Aspects of the theory of syntax. MIT, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Corbetta M, Kincade JM, Ollinger JM, McAvoy MP, Shulman GL (2000) Voluntary orienting is dissociated from target detection in human posterior parietal cortex. Nat Neurosci 3(3):292–297. doi:10.1038/73009

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Corbetta M, Kincade JM, Shulman GL (2002) Neural systems for visual orienting and their relationships to spatial working memory. J Cogn Neurosci 14(3):508–523. doi:10.1162/089892902317362029

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cowles HW (2012) The psychology of information structure. Expr Inf Struct 5:287

    Google Scholar 

  • Cowles HW, Kluender R, Kutas M, Polinsky M (2007) Violations of information structure: an electrophysiological study of answers to wh-questions. Brain Lang 102(3):228–242

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cutler A, Fodor JA (1979) Semantic focus and sentence comprehension. Cognition 7(1):49–59

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dahan D, Tanenhaus MK, Chambers CG (2002) Accent and reference resolution in spoken-language comprehension. J Mem Lang 47(2):292–314

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dimitrova DV, Stowe LA, Redeker G, Hoeks JC (2012) Less is not more: neural responses to missing and superfluous accents in context. J Cogn Neurosci 24(12):2400–2418

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Erickson TD, Mattson ME (1981) From words to meaning: a semantic illusion. J Verbal Learn Verbal Behav 20(5):540–551

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erteschik-Shir N (2007) Information structure: the syntax–discourse interface, vol 3. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Fodor J (1983) The modularity of mind. The MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Frazier L, Fodor JD (1978) The sausage machine: a new two-stage parsing model. Cognition 6(4):291–325

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friederici AD, Kotz SA (2003) The brain basis of syntactic processes: functional imaging and lesion studies. Neuroimage 20, Supplement 1(0) :S8–S17. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2003.09.003

  • Gotzner N, Spalek K, Wartenburger I (2013) How pitch accents and focus particles affect the recognition of contextual alternatives. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 35th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society

  • Gűnther C, Maienborn C, Schopp A (1999) The processing of information structure. In: Bosch P, van der Sandt RA (eds) Focus: linguistic, cognitive, and computational perspectives. Cambridge University press, Cambridge, pp 18–43

    Google Scholar 

  • Gussenhoven C (2008) Notions and subnotions in information structure. Acta Linguist Hung 55(3–4):381–395. doi:10.1556/ALing.55.2008.3-4.11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hahne A, Friederici AD (1999) Electrophysiological evidence for two steps in syntactic analysis: early automatic and late controlled processes. J Cogn Neurosci 11(2):194–205. doi:10.1162/089892999563328

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Halliday MAK (1967) Notes on transitivity and theme in English: part 2. J Linguist 3(02):199–244. doi:10.1017/S0022226700016613

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heim S, Alter K (2006) Prosodic pitch accents in language comprehension and production: ERP data and acoustic analyses. Acta Neurobiol Exp 66(1):55–68

    Google Scholar 

  • Heim S, Alter K (2007) Focus on focus: the brain’s electrophysiological responses to focus particles and accents in German. In: Späth A (ed) Language context and cognition: interfaces and interface conditions. De Gruyter, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Hruska C, Alter K (2004) Prosody in dialogues and single sentences: how prosody can influence speech perception. In: Steube A (ed) Information structure: theoretical and empirical aspects. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, pp 221–226

    Google Scholar 

  • Huettig F, Rommers J, Meyer AS (2011) Using the visual world paradigm to study language processing: a review and critical evaluation. Acta Psychol 137(2):151–171. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.11.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ito K, Garnsey SM (2004) Brain responses to focus-related prosodic mismatch in Japanese. Paper presented at the Speech Prosody 2004, International Conference

  • Jackendoff R (2002) Foundations of language: brain, meaning, grammar, evolution. Oxford University Press, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen O, Bonnefond M, VanRullen R (2012) An oscillatory mechanism for prioritizing salient unattended stimuli. Trends Cogn Sci 16(4):200–206. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2012.03.002

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson SM, Breen M, Clifton CJR, Morris J (2003) ERP investigation of prosodic and semantic focus. Poster presented at Cognitive Neuroscience, New York City

  • Karttunen L, Stanley P (1979) Coventional implicature, vol 11. Academic Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • King J, Just MA (1991) Individual differences in syntactic processing: the role of working memory. J Mem Lang 30(5):580–602

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krahmer E, Swerts M (2007) The effects of visual beats on prosodic prominence: acoustic analyses, auditory perception and visual perception. J Mem Lang 57(3):396–414. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2007.06.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kristensen LB, Wang L, Petersson KM, Hagoort P (2012) The interface between language and attention: prosodic focus marking recruits a general attention network in spoken language comprehension. Cereb Cortex. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhs164

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kutas M, Federmeier KD (2011) Thirty years and counting: finding meaning in the N400 component of the event-related brain potential (ERP). Annu Rev Psychol 62(1):621–647

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lambrecht K (1996) Information structure and sentence form: topic, focus, and the mental representations of discourse referents, vol 71. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Leonard T, Cummins F (2010) The temporal relation between beat gestures and speech. Lang Cogn Process 1–15. doi:10.1080/01690965.2010.500218

  • Li X, Ren G-Q (2012) How and when accentuation influences temporally selective attention and subsequent semantic processing during on-line spoken language comprehension: an ERP study. Neuropsychologia 50(8):1882–1894

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Li X, Yang Y (2013) How long-term memory and accentuation interact during spoken language comprehension. Neuropsychologia 51(5):967–978

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Li X, Hagoort P, Yang Y (2008) Event-related potential evidence on the influence of accentuation in spoken discourse comprehension in Chinese. J Cogn Neurosci 20(5):906–915. doi:10.1162/jocn.2008.20512

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Li X, Chen Y, Yang Y (2011) Immediate integration of different types of prosodic information during on-line spoken language comprehension: an ERP study. Brain Res 1386:139–152. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2011.02.051

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • MacDonald MC (1993) The interaction of lexical and syntactic ambiguity. J Mem Lang 32(5):692–715

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magne C, Astesano C, Lacheret-Dujour A, Morel M, Alter K, Besson M (2005) On-line processing of “pop-out” words in spoken French dialogues. J Cogn Neurosci 17(5):740–756. doi:10.1162/0898929053747667

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McNeill D (1992) Hand and mind: what gestures reveal about thought. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Paterson KB, Liversedge SP, Filik R, Juhasz BJ, White SJ, Rayner K (2007) Focus identification during sentence comprehension: evidence from eye movements. Q J Exp Psychol 60(10):1423–1445

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petersen S, Posner M (2012) The attention system of the human brain: 20 years after. Annu Rev Neurosci 35(1):73–89

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Posner MI, Petersen SE (1990) The attention system of the human brain. Annu Rev Neurosci 13:25–42

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sanford AJS, Sanford AJ, Molle J, Emmott C (2006) Shallow processing and attention capture in written and spoken discourse. Discourse Process 42(2):109–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanford AJ, Price J, Sanford AJ (2009) Enhancement and suppression effects resulting from information structuring in sentences. Mem Cogn 37(6):880–888

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shahin AJ, Picton TW, Miller LM (2009) Brain oscillations during semantic evaluation of speech. Brain Cogn 70(3):259–266

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shipp S (2004) The brain circuitry of attention. Trends Cogn Sci 8(5):223–230

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Steedman M (1991) Structure and intonation. Language 67(2):260–296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sturt P, Sanford A, Stewart A, Dawydiak E (2004) Linguistic focus and good-enough representations: an application of the change-detection paradigm. Psychon Bull Rev 11(5):882–888. doi:10.3758/bf03196716

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Swerts M, Krahmer E, Avesani C (2002) Prosodic marking of information status in Dutch and Italian: a comparative analysis. J Phenetics 30(4):629–654

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Terken J, Nooteboom SG (1987) Opposite effects of accentuation and deaccentuation on verification latencies for given and new information. Lang Cogn Process 2(3):145–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toepel U, Pannekamp A, Alter K (2007) Catching the news: processing strategies in listening to dialogs as measured by ERPs. Behav Brain Funct 3(1):53

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wang L, Chu M (2013) The role of beat gesture and pitch accent in semantic processing: an ERP study. Neuropsychologia 51(13):2847–2855

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wang L, Hagoort P, Yang Y (2009) Semantic illusion depends on information structure: ERP evidence. Brain Res 1282:50–56

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wang L, Bastiaansen M, Yang Y, Hagoort P (2011) The influence of information structure on the depth of semantic processing: how focus and pitch accent determine the size of the N400 effect. Neuropsychologia 49(5):813–820

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wang L, Bastiaansen M, Yang Y, Hagoort P (2012) Information structure influences depth of syntactic processing: event-related potential evidence for the Chomsky illusion. PLoS One 7(10):e47917. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0047917

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wang L, Bastiaansen M, Yang Y, Hagoort P (2013) ERP evidence on the interaction between information structure and emotional salience of words. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. doi:10.3758/s13415-012-0146-2

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ward P, Sturt P (2007) Linguistic focus and memory: an eye movement study. Mem Cogn 35(1):73–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was supported the Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Number: 31200849).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Key Laboratory of Behavioral Science, Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lincui Road 16, Chaoyang District, Beijing, 100101, China

    Lin Wang, Xiaoqing Li & Yufang Yang

Authors
  1. Lin Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Xiaoqing Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yufang Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Lin Wang or Yufang Yang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wang, L., Li, X. & Yang, Y. A review on the cognitive function of information structure during language comprehension. Cogn Neurodyn 8, 353–361 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11571-014-9305-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11571-014-9305-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation