Familial Sinistrality and Syntactic Processing

  • Wayne Cowart
Part of the Human Neuropsychology book series (HN)


This paper reviews recent indications that subjects with no left-handed relatives (FS- subjects) differ from FS+ subjects in syntactic processing. An experiment contrasting the performance of these two subject types on subordinate and coordinate clause sentences appears to support indications that FS-subjects have more ready access to some specifically syntactic representation of incoming sentences.


Noun Phrase Clause Relation Main Clause Subordinate Clause Subject Type 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Andrews, R. J. (1977) Aspects of language lateralization correlated with familial handedness. Neuropsychologia, 15, 769–778.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bever, T.G., Carrithers, C. and Townsend, D. (1987) In Proceedings: Ninth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Hillsdale, NJ: L. Erlbaum Assoc. Pp 764–773.Google Scholar
  3. Bever, T.G., Carrithers, C., Cowart, W. and Townsend, D. (in preparation) Right-handers with no left-handed relatives are more sensitive to syntactic structures than right-handers with left-handed relatives.Google Scholar
  4. Chomsky, N. (1981) Lectures on Government and Binding. Amsterdam: Foris.Google Scholar
  5. Cowart, W. (1987) Syntax and the accessibility of antecedents in relation to neurophysio logical variation. In Proceedings: Ninth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Hillsdale, NJ: L. Erlbaum Assoc. Pp 811–823.Google Scholar
  6. Fodor, J.A. (1983) The modularity of mind. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  7. Freedman and Forster, K.I. (1985) The psychological status of overgenerated sentences. Cognition, 19, 101–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Geschwind, N. and Galaburda, A. (1987) Cerebral lateralization. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  9. Hecaen, H. and Sauguet, J. (1971) Cerebral dominance in left-handed subjects. Cortex, 7, 19–48.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Kennedy, A. and Murray, W.S. (1984) Inspections times for words in syntactically ambiguous sentences under three presentation conditions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10, 833–849.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. McKeever, W. F. et al (1983) Interacting sex and familial sinistrality characteristics influence both language lateralization and spatial ability in right handers. Neuropsychologia, 21, 661–668.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. McKeever, W. F. and VanDeventer, A. D. (1977) Visual and auditory language processing asymmetries: Influences of handedness, familial sinistrality, and sex. Cortex, 13, 225–241.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Reinhart, T. (1983). Anaphora and semantic interpretation. Chicago, IL: Univ. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  14. Riemsdijk, H. and Williams, E. (1986) Introduction to the theory of grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  15. Taylor, H. G. and Heilman, K. M. (1982) Monaural recall and the right-ear advantage. Brain and Language, 15, 334–339.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wayne Cowart

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations