Publications at Bielefeld University

PUB

Hintergrundbild
Hintergrundbild
University from A-Z

Die kortikale Verarbeitung semantischer Domänen : eine ERP-Studie

Wengenroth A (2005)
Bielefeld (Germany): Bielefeld University.
Download
5.00 MB
Bielefeld Doctoral Thesis | German
 
Authors
Supervisors
Müller, Horst (Prof. Dr. Dr.)
Department
Arbeitsgruppe Klinische Linguistik
Alternative Title
Cortical processing of semantic domains : an ERP study
Abstract:
From a semantic point of view concrete nouns can be divided into different categories or domains such as living - non-living as well as into different lexical hierarchies (e.g. dog - beagle). Psycholinguistic and aphasiological case studies as well as neurophysiological investigations have shown that distinct semantic categories can be selectively damaged or show advantages in processing. However, these mental lexicon structures are still sketchy with regard to psycho- and neurolinguistics. It is still unknown if semantic categories and lexical hierarchies are just a theoretical construct or if they have a cognitive reality. Neurolinguistic approaches vary in their assumptions as to whether mental lexicon structures are feature-, evolution- or structure-based representations.
30 subjects (15m/15f) from 19 - 33 years (av. 23,8 ± 4, right handed) participated in the experiment. We used Electrocap with 32 scalp electrodes (10/20-system) and 4 eye electrodes. We conducted t-tests and ANOVA.
We presented 240 spoken words from 12 domains (= 6 pairs, 20 stimuli per domain) as well as 160 colour pictures from 8 categories (= only 4 pairs, because some categories can not be depicted, 20 stimuli per category). The semantic domains were: living (e.g. bee, tongue) vs. non-living (e.g. cover, shelf), edible (e.g. apple, ham) vs. inedible (e.g. car, garden), functional (e.g. anchor, scrubber) vs. sensory (e.g. bell, cactus), man-made (e.g. cup, paper) vs. natural (e.g. oat, fir), countable (e.g. coin, soap) vs. not countable (e.g. iron, hail) and hyperonym (e.g. cutlery, insect) vs. hyponym (e.g. nippers, fork).
Significant results in the auditory condition can be found in the distinction between two different lexical hierarchies. Listening to two lexical hierarchies can evoke strong differences in their amplitude course. Auditorily presented hyperonyms (superordination) elicit a higher and prolonged negativity in contrast to hyponyms (subordination) in almost all scalp electrodes.
There where no significant results in the following category pairs: living vs. non-living, edible vs. inedible, functional vs. sensory, man-made vs. natural as well as countable vs. not countable.
We found significant results in all categories in the visual condition. The amplitude courses of different categories have all one thing in common: the presentation of "sensory quality" objects (which are represented by taste, scent, tactile sense) elicits higher negativity around 200 ms post word-onset and lower negativity around 550 ms post word-onset in comparison to more functionally represented objects (e.g. tools, vehicles, machines).
The results in the acoustic condition support the assumption, that these hierarchies are processed differently on a neural level. An assumption of this is the fact, that hyperonyms contain only little sensory/perceptual information and are less specific in their semantic concepts in contrast to hyponyms, which are more concrete and thus have more specific semantic concepts and which contain a lot of sensory/perceptual information.
The differences between the amplitude courses of the contrasted categories in the visual condition are similar. The fact that the amplitude courses for the "sensory quality" categories are all similar in contrast to those of more functionally represented objects leads to the assumption that sensory/perceptual knowledge is processed differently to functional knowledge about objects on a neural level.
The results of the auditory and visual presentation of different hierarchies and categories show that conceptual knowledge may be organised through different conceptual structures. The fact that the differences beween the semantic categories in the visual condition are much stronger than in the auditory condition can be explained by the picture-superiority-effect.

In dieser Arbeit wurden das begriffliche Wissen über Objekte unserer Umwelt und deren Benennungen untersucht. Dabei werden theoretisch-linguistische Vorstellungen der Wortsemantik ebenso wie Daten aus der angewandten Linguistik zur Untersuchung der Repräsentation begrifflichen Wissens herangezogen. Auf theoretisch-semantischer Ebene können Objekte, deren Benennungen und ihre semantischen Informationen in Kategorien (z.B. Tiere, Werkzeuge, Gemüse) oder Domänen (belebt, essbar, zählbar) eingeteilt werden.
Seit der Veröffentlichung von Warrington und McCarthy im Jahr 1983, in der sie einen Patienten mit einem domänenspezifischen semantischen Defizit für belebte Objekte bei erhaltenen Verarbeitungsfähigkeiten für Objekte der Domäne unbelebt beschreiben, gibt es eine Vielzahl von neurolinguistischen Studien, die ähnliche oder gleiche Phänomene beschreiben.
Es stellt sich die Frage, ob semantisches Wissen und semantische Kategorien oder Domänen ein rein theoretisches Konstrukt sind oder ob ihnen eine kognitive Realität anhaftet. Die Gestaltung der neuroanatomischen Strukturen dieser Wissensrepräsentationen stellt im Zusammenhang mit dieser Frage ein ebenso wichtiges wie interessantes Schlüsselproblem dar. Die Theorien über die neuronale Organisation der semantischen Informationen lassen sich zweiteilen: Die einen postulieren distinkte, nicht miteinander vernetzte neuronale Regionen, die auf die Verarbeitung bestimmter semantischer Informationen spezialisiert sind, und die anderen setzen voraus, dass semantisches bzw. konzeptuelles Wissen in einem neuroanatomisch undifferenzierten Netz verarbeitet wird.
Drei große Hauptrichtungen von Ansätzen zur Erklärung der semantischen Wissensrepräsentation von Wörtern und Objekten werden unterschieden:
1. Merkmalsbasierte Ansätze gehen von einer Einteilung des Wissens nach semantischen Eigenschaften, wie z.B. sensorischen und funktionalen Attributen, aus. Dies ist die sensorisch-funktionale Theorie (SFT).
2. Domänenspezifische Ansätze nehmen mehrere kognitive semantische Systeme an, die evolutionär bedingt sind und von verschiedenen neuronalen Netzwerken unterstützt werden.
3. Ansätze eines verteilten neuronalen Netzwerkes bzw. konzeptstrukturspezifische Ansätze (conceptual structure accounts) gehen anders als die oben genannten lokalisationistischen Ansätze davon aus, dass ein neuronales Netzwerk existiert, welches weder nach semantischen Merkmalen noch Domänen unterteilt ist.
In der vorliegenden Studie wurde die kortikale Verarbeitung verschiedener semantischer Domänen in einem EEG-Experiment untersucht. Den 30 sprachgesunden Versuchspersonen wurden 280 natürlichsprachliche und 200 visuelle Stimuli präsentiert, während ein 32-Kanal EEG abgeleitet wurde. Das Stimulusmaterial unterschied sich durch ein semantisches Merkmal voneinander (z.B. Belebtheit, Natürlichkeit, Essbarkeit usw. sowie Sub- oder Superordination). Die Probanden sollten die Nomen bzw. Bilder lediglich wahrnehmen.
Für die akustische Präsentation der Wörter ergeben sich hochsignifikante Unterschiede bei den ERP-Verläufen zwischen den linguistischen Hierarchien Hyperonym vs. Hyponym. Hyperonyme zeigen eine anhaltende stärkere Negativierung gegenüber den Hyponymen. Möglicherweise ist der Grund dafür die abstraktere Merkmalsstruktur der Hyperonyme und die damit verbundene weniger ausgeprägte perzeptuelle/sensorische Repräsentation. Die Ergebnisse des visuellen Teilexperiments zeigen hochsignifikante Unterschiede bei der kortikalen Verarbeitung von stark funktional (z.B. Hammer) und stark sensorisch (z.B. Katze) repräsentierten Nomina konkreta. Die Ergebnisse sprechen für die Annahme, dass semantisches Wissen zwar nach sensorischen/perzeptuellen und funktionalen Merkmalen getrennt ist, dass diese Trennung jedoch nicht unbedingt neuroanatomisch diskret verankert sein muss. Die Merkmalsstrukturen von stark funktional und stark sensorisch repräsentierten Nomina konkreta differieren laut dem konzeptstrukturspezifischen Ansatz in hohem Maß und werden in einem verteilten, vereinten neuronalen Netzwerk verarbeitet. Möglicherweise liegt der Unterschied zwischen den Amplitudenunterschieden der Domänen in der Merkmals- bzw. Konzeptstruktur selbst. Die vorhandenen Ergebnisse der ERP-Untersuchung unterstützen diesen Ansatz, weil sie sowohl eine Aktivierung in großen Gebieten des zerebralen Kortex aufzeigen als auch Verarbeitungsunterschiede zwischen stark sensorisch repräsentierten Objekten und stark funktional repräsentierten Objekten, die sich in ihrer semantischen Merkmalsstruktur grundlegend voneinander unterscheiden.
Keywords
Kognitive Semantik , Lexikalische Kategorie , Grammatische Kategorie , Domänenstruktur , Ereigniskorreliertes Potenzial , Semantische Kategorien , Semantische Domänen , Semantisches Gedächtnis , Aphasiologie , Evozierte Potentiale , Semantic categories , Semantic domains , Semantic memory , Aphasiology , Event-related potentials
Year
2005
Access Level
Open Access
 
This data publication is cited in the following publications:
This publication cites the following data publications:
 
Wengenroth A. Die kortikale Verarbeitung semantischer Domänen : eine ERP-Studie. Bielefeld (Germany): Bielefeld University; 2005.
Wengenroth, A. (2005). Die kortikale Verarbeitung semantischer Domänen : eine ERP-Studie. Bielefeld (Germany): Bielefeld University.
Wengenroth, A. (2005). Die kortikale Verarbeitung semantischer Domänen : eine ERP-Studie. Bielefeld (Germany): Bielefeld University.
Wengenroth, A., 2005. Die kortikale Verarbeitung semantischer Domänen : eine ERP-Studie. Bielefeld (Germany): Bielefeld University.
A. Wengenroth, “Die kortikale Verarbeitung semantischer Domänen : eine ERP-Studie”, Bielefeld University, 2005.
Wengenroth, A.: Die kortikale Verarbeitung semantischer Domänen : eine ERP-Studie, (2005).
Wengenroth, Alexandra. “Die kortikale Verarbeitung semantischer Domänen : eine ERP-Studie”. Bielefeld (Germany): Bielefeld University, 2005.
@phdthesis{2302931,
  abstract     = {From a semantic point of view concrete nouns can be divided into different categories or domains such as living - non-living as well as into different lexical hierarchies (e.g. dog - beagle). Psycholinguistic and aphasiological case studies as well as neurophysiological investigations have shown that distinct semantic categories can be selectively damaged or show advantages in processing. However, these mental lexicon structures are still sketchy with regard to psycho- and neurolinguistics. It is still unknown if semantic categories and lexical hierarchies are just a theoretical construct or if they have a cognitive reality. Neurolinguistic approaches vary in their assumptions as to whether mental lexicon structures are feature-, evolution- or structure-based representations.
30 subjects (15m/15f) from 19 - 33 years (av. 23,8 {\textpm} 4, right handed) participated in the experiment. We used Electrocap with 32 scalp electrodes (10/20-system) and 4 eye electrodes. We conducted t-tests and ANOVA.
We presented 240 spoken words from 12 domains (= 6 pairs, 20 stimuli per domain) as well as 160 colour pictures from 8 categories (= only 4 pairs, because some categories can not be depicted, 20 stimuli per category). The semantic domains were: living (e.g. bee, tongue) vs. non-living (e.g. cover, shelf), edible (e.g. apple, ham) vs. inedible (e.g. car, garden), functional (e.g. anchor, scrubber) vs. sensory (e.g. bell, cactus), man-made (e.g. cup, paper) vs. natural (e.g. oat, fir), countable (e.g. coin, soap) vs. not countable (e.g. iron, hail) and hyperonym (e.g. cutlery, insect) vs. hyponym (e.g. nippers, fork).
Significant results in the auditory condition can be found in the distinction between two different lexical hierarchies. Listening to two lexical hierarchies can evoke strong differences in their amplitude course. Auditorily presented hyperonyms (superordination) elicit a higher and prolonged negativity in contrast to hyponyms (subordination) in almost all scalp electrodes.
There where no significant results in the following category pairs: living vs. non-living, edible vs. inedible, functional vs. sensory, man-made vs. natural as well as countable vs. not countable.
We found significant results in all categories in the visual condition. The amplitude courses of different categories have all one thing in common: the presentation of {\textacutedbl}sensory quality{\textacutedbl} objects (which are represented by taste, scent, tactile sense) elicits higher negativity around 200 ms post word-onset and lower negativity around 550 ms post word-onset in comparison to more functionally represented objects (e.g. tools, vehicles, machines).
The results in the acoustic condition support the assumption, that these hierarchies are processed differently on a neural level. An assumption of this is the fact, that hyperonyms contain only little sensory/perceptual information and are less specific in their semantic concepts in contrast to hyponyms, which are more concrete and thus have more specific semantic concepts and which contain a lot of sensory/perceptual information.
The differences between the amplitude courses of the contrasted categories in the visual condition are similar. The fact that the amplitude courses for the {\textacutedbl}sensory quality{\textacutedbl} categories are all similar in contrast to those of more functionally represented objects leads to the assumption that sensory/perceptual knowledge is processed differently to functional knowledge about objects on a neural level.
The results of the auditory and visual presentation of different hierarchies and categories show that conceptual knowledge may be organised through different conceptual structures. The fact that the differences beween the semantic categories in the visual condition are much stronger than in the auditory condition can be explained by the picture-superiority-effect.},
  author       = {Wengenroth, Alexandra},
  language     = {German},
  publisher    = {Bielefeld University},
  school       = {Bielefeld University},
  title        = {Die kortikale Verarbeitung semantischer Dom{\"a}nen : eine ERP-Studie},
  year         = {2005},
}

TY  - GEN
AB  - From a semantic point of view concrete nouns can be divided into different categories or domains such as living - non-living as well as into different lexical hierarchies (e.g. dog - beagle). Psycholinguistic and aphasiological case studies as well as neurophysiological investigations have shown that distinct semantic categories can be selectively damaged or show advantages in processing. However, these mental lexicon structures are still sketchy with regard to psycho- and neurolinguistics. It is still unknown if semantic categories and lexical hierarchies are just a theoretical construct or if they have a cognitive reality. Neurolinguistic approaches vary in their assumptions as to whether mental lexicon structures are feature-, evolution- or structure-based representations.
30 subjects (15m/15f) from 19 - 33 years (av. 23,8 ± 4, right handed) participated in the experiment. We used Electrocap with 32 scalp electrodes (10/20-system) and 4 eye electrodes. We conducted t-tests and ANOVA.
We presented 240 spoken words from 12 domains (= 6 pairs, 20 stimuli per domain) as well as 160 colour pictures from 8 categories (= only 4 pairs, because some categories can not be depicted, 20 stimuli per category). The semantic domains were: living (e.g. bee, tongue) vs. non-living (e.g. cover, shelf), edible (e.g. apple, ham) vs. inedible (e.g. car, garden), functional (e.g. anchor, scrubber) vs. sensory (e.g. bell, cactus), man-made (e.g. cup, paper) vs. natural (e.g. oat, fir), countable (e.g. coin, soap) vs. not countable (e.g. iron, hail) and hyperonym (e.g. cutlery, insect) vs. hyponym (e.g. nippers, fork).
Significant results in the auditory condition can be found in the distinction between two different lexical hierarchies. Listening to two lexical hierarchies can evoke strong differences in their amplitude course. Auditorily presented hyperonyms (superordination) elicit a higher and prolonged negativity in contrast to hyponyms (subordination) in almost all scalp electrodes.
There where no significant results in the following category pairs: living vs. non-living, edible vs. inedible, functional vs. sensory, man-made vs. natural as well as countable vs. not countable.
We found significant results in all categories in the visual condition. The amplitude courses of different categories have all one thing in common: the presentation of "sensory quality" objects (which are represented by taste, scent, tactile sense) elicits higher negativity around 200 ms post word-onset and lower negativity around 550 ms post word-onset in comparison to more functionally represented objects (e.g. tools, vehicles, machines).
The results in the acoustic condition support the assumption, that these hierarchies are processed differently on a neural level. An assumption of this is the fact, that hyperonyms contain only little sensory/perceptual information and are less specific in their semantic concepts in contrast to hyponyms, which are more concrete and thus have more specific semantic concepts and which contain a lot of sensory/perceptual information.
The differences between the amplitude courses of the contrasted categories in the visual condition are similar. The fact that the amplitude courses for the "sensory quality" categories are all similar in contrast to those of more functionally represented objects leads to the assumption that sensory/perceptual knowledge is processed differently to functional knowledge about objects on a neural level.
The results of the auditory and visual presentation of different hierarchies and categories show that conceptual knowledge may be organised through different conceptual structures. The fact that the differences beween the semantic categories in the visual condition are much stronger than in the auditory condition can be explained by the picture-superiority-effect.
AU  - Wengenroth, Alexandra
ID  - 2302931
KW  - Semantic domains , Semantic memory , Aphasiology , Event-related potentials
PB  - Bielefeld University
PY  - 2005
TI  - Die kortikale Verarbeitung semantischer Domänen : eine ERP-Studie
U3  - PUB:ID 2302931
UR  - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:hbz:361-8414
ER  - 
Export
0 Marked Publication

Open Data PUB

Search this title in

Google Scholar
BASE
Google