Involvement of prefrontal cortex in scalar implicatures: evidence from magnetoencephalography

References

• Barbey, A., Koenigs, M., & Grafman, J. (2013). Dorsolateral prefrontal contributions to human working memory. Cortex, 49, 1195–1205. doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2012.05.022
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barr, D., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68, 255–278. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bemis, D., & Pylkkänen, L. (2011). Simple composition: A magnetoencephalography investigation into the comprehension of minimal linguistic phrases. The Journal of Neuroscience, 31, 2801–2814. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5003-10.2011
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benjamini, Y., & Yekutieli, D. (2001). The control of the false discovery rate in multiple testing under dependency. Annals of Statistics, 29, 1165–1188. doi:10.1186/1471-2105-9-114
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergen, L., & Grodner, D. J. (2012). Speaker knowledge influences the comprehension of pragmatic inferences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38, 1450. doi:10.1037/a0027850
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bilenko, N., Grindrod, C., Myers, E., & Blumstein, S. (2009). Neural correlates of semantic competition during processing of ambiguous words. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 21, 960–975. doi:10.1162/jocn.2009.21073
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2014). Praat: Doing phonetics by computer [Computer program]. Retrieved from http://www.praat.org/
   Google Scholar
• Bott, L., Bailey, T., & Grodner, D. (2012). Distinguishing speed from accuracy in scalar implicatures. Journal of Memory and Language, 66, 123–142. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2011.09.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bott, L., & Noveck, I. (2004). Some utterances are underinformative: The onset and time course of scalar inferences. Journal of Memory and Language, 51, 437–457. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2004.05.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Breheny, R., Ferguson, H., & Katsos, N. (2012). Investigating the time-course of accessing conversational implicatures during incremental sentence interpretation. Language and Cognitive Processes, 28, 443–467. doi:10.1080/01690965.2011.649040
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Breheny, R., Ferguson, H. J., & Katsos, N. (2013). Taking the epistemic step: Toward a model of on-line access to conversational implicatures. Cognition, 126, 423–440. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2012.11.012
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Breheny, R., Katsos, N., & Williams, J. (2006). Are generalised scalar implicatures generated by default? An on-line investigation into the role of context in generating pragmatic inferences. Cognition, 100, 434–463. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2005.07.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caplan, D. (2006). Why is Broca's area involved in syntax? Cortex, 42, 469–471. doi:10.1016/S0010-9452(08)70379-4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chee, M. W., Hon, N. H., Caplan, D., Lee, H. L., & Goh, J. (2002). Frequency of concrete words modulates prefrontal activation during semantic judgments. Neuroimage, 16, 259–268. doi:10.1006/nimg.2002.1061
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chemla, E., & Singh, R. (2014). Remarks on the experimental turn in the study of scalar implicature. Language and Linguistics Compass, 8, 373–386. doi:10.1111/lnc3.12081
   Google Scholar
• Chemla, E., & Spector, B. (2011). Experimental evidence for embedded scalar implicatures. Journal of Semantics, 28, 359–400. doi:10.1093/jos/ffq023
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chevallier, C., Bonnefond, M., Van der Henst, J.-B., & Noveck, I. (2010). Using ERPs to capture inferential processes guided by prosodic cues. Italian Journal of Linguistics, 22, 125–152.
   Google Scholar
• Chevallier, C., Noveck, I., Nazir, T., Bott, L., Lanzetti, V., & Sperber, D. (2008). Making disjunctions exclusive. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61, 1741–1760. doi:10.1080/17470210701712960
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chierchia, G. (2004). Scalar implicatures, polarity phenomena, and the syntax/pragmatics interface. Structures and Beyond, 3, 39–103.
   Google Scholar
• Chierchia, G., Fox, D., & Spector, B. (2012). Scalar implicature as a grammatical phenomenon. In K. von Heusinger, Maienborn, C., & Portner, P. (Eds.), Semantics: An international handbook of natural language meaning (Vol. 3, pp. 2297–2331). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• Copland, D., Zubicaray, G., McMahon, K., & Eastburn, M. (2007). Neural correlates of semantic priming for ambiguous words: An event-related fMRI study. Brain Research, 1131, 163–172. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2006.11.016
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Degen, J. ( in press). Investigating the distribution of some (but not all) implicatures using corpora and web-based methods. Semantics and Pragmatics.
   Google Scholar
• Degen, J., & Tanenhaus, M. (2014). Processing scalar implicature: A constraint-based approach. Cognitive Science. Advance online publication. doi:10.1111/cogs.12171
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Neys, W., & Schaeken, W. (2007). When people are more logical under cognitive load. Experimental Psychology, 54, 128–133. doi:10.1027/1618-3169.54.2.128
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dieussaert, K., Verkerk, S., Gillard, E., & Schaeken, W. (2011). Some effort for some: Further evidence that scalar implicatures are effortful. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 64, 2352–2367. doi:10.1080/17470218.2011.588799
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Egorova, N., Shtyrov, Y., & Pulvermüller, F. (2013). Early and parallel processing of pragmatic and semantic information in speech acts: Neurophysiological evidence. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2013.00086
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feeney, A., Scafton, S., Duckworth, A., & Handley, S. (2004). The story of some: Everyday pragmatic inferences by children and adults. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54, 128–133. doi:10.1037/h0085792
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fiebach, C., Vos, S., & Friderici, A. (2004). Neural correlates of syntactic ambiguity in sentence comprehension for low and high span readers. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 16, 1562–1575. doi:10.1162/0898929042568479
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geurts, B. (2010). Quantity implicatures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Geurts, B., & Pouscoulous, N. (2009). Embedded implicatures?!? Semantics and Pragmatics, 2, 4–1. doi:10.3765/sp.2.4
   Google Scholar
• Goodman, N., & Stuhlmüller, A. (2013). Knowledge and implicature: Modeling language understanding as social cognition. Topics in Cognitive Science, 5, 173–184. doi:10.1111/tops.12007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grodner, D., Klein, N., Carbary, K., & Tanenhaus, M. (2010). “Some,” and possibly all, scalar inferences are not delayed: Evidence for immediate pragmatic enrichment. Cognition, 116, 42. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2010.03.014
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grodner, D., & Russell, B. (2013, March). Evidence for a rational probabilistic account of Gricean implicatures. Poster presented at 26th CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing, Columbus, OH, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Hartshorne, J., Liem Azar, S., Snedeker, J., & Kim, A. (2014). The neural computation of scalar implicature. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 30, 620–634. doi:10.1080/23273798.2014.981195
   Google Scholar
• Hartshorne, J., & Snedeker, J. (2014). The speed of inference: Evidence against rapid use of context in calculation of scalar implicatures. Manuscript submitted for publication.
   Google Scholar
• Hashimoto, R., & Sakai, K. (2002). Specialization in the left prefrontal cortex for sentence comprehension. Neuron, 35, 589–597.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horn, L. (1972). On the semantic properties of logical operators in English ( Ph.D. dissertation). University of California, Los Angeles.
   Google Scholar
• Huang, Y., & Snedeker, J. (2009). Online interpretation of scalar quantifiers: Insight into the semantics-pragmatics interface. Cognitive Psychology, 58, 376–415. doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2008.09.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang, Y., & Snedeker, J. (2011). Logic and conversation revisited: Evidence for a division between semantic and pragmatic content in real-time language comprehension. Language and Cognitive Processes, 26, 1161–1172. doi:10.1080/01690965.2010.508641
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hunt, L., Politzer-Ahles, S., Gibson, L., Minai, U., & Fiorentino, R. (2013). Pragmatic inferences modulate N400 during sentence comprehension: Evidence from picture-sentence verification. Neuroscience Letters, 534, 246–251. doi:10.1016/j.neulet.2012.11.044
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Katsos, N., & Cummins, C. (2010). Pragmatics: From theory to experiment and back again. Language and Linguistics Compass, 4, 282–295. doi:10.1111/j.1749-818X.2010.00203.x
   Google Scholar
• Levinson, S. C. (2000). Presumptive meanings: The theory of generalized conversational implicature. Cambridge: MIT press.
   Google Scholar
• Lewis, S. (2013). Pragmatic enrichment in language processing and development ( PhD dissertation). University of Maryland, College Park.
   Google Scholar
• Maris, E., & Oostenveld, R. (2007). Nonparametric statistical testing of EEG- and MEG-data. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 164, 177–190. doi:10.1016/j.jneumeth.2007.03.024
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marty, P., & Chemla, E. (2013). Scalar implicatures: Working memory and a comparison with only. Frontiers in Psychology, 4. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00403
   Google Scholar
• Marty, P., Chemla, E., & Spector, B. (2013). Interpreting numerals and scalar items under memory load. Lingua, 133, 152–163. doi:10.1016/j.lingua.2013.03.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Minai, U., & Fiorentino, R. (2010). The role of the focus operator only in children's computation of sentence meaning. Language Acquisition, 17, 183–190. doi:10.1080/10489223.2010.497399
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nieuwland, M. S., Ditman, T., & Kuperberg, G. R. (2010). On the incrementality of pragmatic processing: An ERP investigation of informativeness and pragmatic abilities. Journal of Memory and Language, 63, 324–346. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2010.06.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noveck, I., & Posada, A. (2003). Characterizing the time course of an implicature: An evoked potentials study. Brain and Language, 85, 203–210. doi:10.1016/S0093-934X(03)00053-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noveck, I., & Reboul, A. (2008). Experimental pragmatics: A Gricean turn in the study of language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12, 425–431. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2008.07.009
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noveck, I., & Sperber, D. (2007). The why and how of experimental pragmatics: The case of ‘scalar inferences’. In N. Burton-Roberts (Ed.), Advances in pragmatics (pp. 184–212). Basingstoke: Palgrave.
   Google Scholar
• Oldfield, R. C. (1971). The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia, 9(1), 97–113. doi:10.1016/0028-3932(71)90067-4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Panizza, D., & Onea, E. (2014, March). Some implicatures take their time: An ERP study on scalar implicatures with ‘sentence-picture vs. picture-sentence’ verification task. Talk presented at 27th CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing, Columbia, SC, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Politzer-Ahles, S., & Fiorentino, R. (2013). The realization of scalar inferences: Context sensitivity without processing cost. PloS ONE, 8(5), e63943. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0063943
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Politzer-Ahles, S., Fiorentino, R., Durbin, J., & Li, L. (2014,). The role of working memory in the online realization of scalar inferences. Poster presented at 27th CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing, Columbia, SC, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Politzer-Ahles, S., Fiorentino, R., Jiang, X., & Zhou, X. (2013). Distinct neural correlates for pragmatic and semantic meaning processing: An event-related potential investigation of scalar implicature processing using picture-sentence verification. Brain Research, 1490, 134–152. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2012.10.042
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sauerland, U. (2012). The Computation of scalar implicatures: Pragmatic, lexical or grammatical? Language and Linguistics Compass, 6, 36–49. doi:10.1002/lnc3.321
   Google Scholar
• Shetreet, E., Chierchia, G., & Gaab, N. (2014). When some is not every: Dissociating scalar implicature generation and mismatch. Human Brain Mapping, 35, 1503–1514. doi:10.1002/hbm.22269
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sikos, L., Tomlinson, S., Traut, H., & Grodner, D. (2013, March). Incremental computation of scalar implicatures: An ERP study. Poster presented at 26th CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing, Columbus, OH, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Sperber, D., & Wilson, C. (1995). Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Yekutieli, D., & Benjamini, Y. (1999). Resampling-based false discovery rate controlling multiple test procedures for correlated test statistics. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 82, 171–196. doi:10.1016/S0378-3758(99)00041-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhao, M., Liu, T., Chen, G., & Chen, F. (2015). Are scalar implictures automatically processed and different for each individual? A mismatch negativity (MMN) study. Brain Research, 1599, 137–149. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2014.11.049
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar