Abstract
The N400 and the P600 are two patterns of electrical brain potentials which can sometimes be found when people read or hear unexpected words. They have been widely claimed to be the neurological correlates of semantic and syntactic anomalies, respectively, but evidence accumulated over the last decade has raised some serious doubts about that interpretation. In this paper, I first review some of this evidence and then present an alternative way to think about the issue. My suggestion is built on Shannon’s concept of noisy-channel decoding by tables of typical sets, and it is thus fundamentally statistical in nature. I show that a proper application of Shannon’s concepts to the reading process provides an interesting reinterpretation of our notion of “syntax,” thus questioning some fundamental assumptions of linguistics.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Anderson, J. R. (1991). The place of cognitive architectures in a rational analysis. In K. VanLehn (Ed.), Architectures for intelligence (pp. 1–24). New York: Psychology Press.
Bellman, R. (1952). On the theory of dynamic programming. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 38(8), 716.
Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I., & Schlesewsky, M. (2008). ProminencePlausibility: An alternative perspective on semantic P600 effects in language comprehension. Brain Research Reviews, 5(1), 55–73.
Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic structures. The Hague: Walter de Gruyter.
Cover, T. (1975). An achievable rate region for the broadcast channel. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 21(4), 399–404.
Cover, T. M., & Thomas, J. A. (1991). Elements of information theory. New York: Wiley-Interscience.
Damerau, F. J. (1964). A technique for computer detection and correction of spelling errors. Communications of the ACM, 7(3), 171–176.
Fernández, E. M., & Cairns, H. S. (2010). Fundamentals of psycholinguistics. Malden: Wiley.
Francis, W. N., & Kucera, H. (1967). Computational analysis of present-day American English. Providence: Brown University Press.
Frenzel, S., Schlesewsky, M., & Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I. (2011). Conflicts in language processing: A new perspective on the N400–P600 distinction. Neuropsychologia, 49(3), 574–579.
Gibson, E., Bergen, L., & Piantadosi, S. T. (2013). Rational integration of noisy evidence and prior semantic expectations in sentence interpretation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(20), 8051–8056.
Hoeks, J. C. J., Stowe, L. A., & Doedens, G. (2004). Seeing words in context: The interaction of lexical and sentence level information during reading. Cognitive Brain Research, 19(1), 59–73.
Kim, A., & Osterhout, L. (2005). The independence of combinatory semantic processing: Evidence from event-related potentials. Journal of Memory and Language, 52(2), 205–225.
Knight, K. (1999). Decoding complexity in word-replacement translation models. Computational Linguistics, 25(4), 607–615.
Kolk, H. H. J., Chwilla, D. J., van Herten, M., & Oor, P. J. W. (2003). Structure and limited capacity in verbal working memory: A study with event-related potentials. Brain and Language, 85(1), 1–36.
Kuperberg, G. R. (2007). Neural mechanisms of language comprehension. Brain Research, 1146, 23–49.
Kuperberg, G. R., Sitnikova, T., Caplan, D., & Holcomb, P. J. (2003). Electrophysiological distinctions in processing conceptual relationships within simple sentences. Cognitive Brain Research, 17(1), 117–129.
Kutas, M., & Federmeier, K. D. (2011). Thirty years and counting: Finding meaning in the N400 component of the event-related brain potential (ERP). Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 621–647.
Kutas, M., & Hillyard, S. A. (1980). Reading senseless sentences: Brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity. Science, 207(4427), 203–205.
Levenshtein, V. I. (1966). Binary codes capable of correcting deletions, insertions and reversals. In Soviet Physics Doklady, 10, 707.
Neyman, J., & Pearson, E. S. (1928). On the use and interpretation of certain test criteria for purposes of statistical inference: Part i. Biometrika, 20A(1/2), 175–240.
Nieuwland, M. S., & Van Berkum, J. J. A. (2005). Testing the limits of the semantic illusion phenomenon: ERPs reveal temporary semantic change deafness in discourse comprehension. Cognitive Brain Research, 24(3), 691–701.
Osterhout, L., & Holcomb, P. J. (1993). Event-related potentials and syntactic anomaly: Evidence of anomaly detection during the perception of continuous speech. Language and Cognitive Processes, 8(4), 413–437.
Rösler, F., Pütz, P., Friederici, A., & Hahne, A. (1993). Event-related brain potentials while encountering semantic and syntactic constraint violations. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 5(3), 345–362.
Samson, E. W. (1951). Fundamental natural concepts of information theory. Technical report E 5079, Air Force Cambridge Research Center
Shannon, C. E. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. Bell System Technical Journal, 27, 379–423.
van Herten, M., Kolk, H. H. J., & Chwilla, D. J. (2005). An ERP study of P600 effects elicited by semantic anomalies. Cognitive Brain Research, 22(2), 241–255.
van Herten, M., Chwilla, D. J., & Kolk, H. H. J. (2006). When heuristics clash with parsing routines: ERP evidence for conflict monitoring in sentence perception. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18(7), 1181–1197.
Viterbi, A. (1967). Error bounds for convolutional codes and an asymptotically optimum decoding algorithm. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 13(2), 260–269.
Weckerly, J., & Kutas, M. (1999). An electrophysiological analysis of animacy effects in the processing of object relative sentences. Psychophysiology, 36(5), 559–570.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Madsen, M.W. (2015). Shannon Versus Chomsky: Brain Potentials and the Syntax-Semantics Distinction. In: Zeevat, H., Schmitz, HC. (eds) Bayesian Natural Language Semantics and Pragmatics. Language, Cognition, and Mind, vol 2. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17064-0_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17064-0_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-17063-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-17064-0
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawSocial Sciences (R0)