Book chapter
Электроэнцефалографическое исследование связывания признаков зрительных стимулов в зависимости от внимания
In book
Reference to a time frame in which an event takes place can be done by verb inflection. If the time frame (past, present, future) is set by a temporal adverb, the verb inflection should correspond (yesterday he walk. ed; today he walk. s). Temporal violations by simple verbs (single, lexical verbs inflected with tense) in the present tense and with present time reference elicit a P600 effect (Baggio, 2008; Dragoy, Stowe, Bos, & Bastiaanse, 2012). However tense does not always coincide with time reference; in languages such as Dutch and English, reference to the past can be established by using the present tense in the present perfect (e.g. 'he has eaten the cake'). The current study investigates whether the P600 effects described by Dragoy et al. and Baggio are caused by tense or time reference violations of the verb. In the context of a past adverb, ERP responses to auxiliaries in present tense with either congruent past time reference or incongruent non-past time reference were compared. The findings show that the P600 effect for violations of the temporal context is caused by the time reference of the complete verb form, rather than by the tense.
The goal of the present study was to investigate event-related potential (ERP) responses to Dutch negative and positive polarity adverbs of degree presented in licensed and unlicensed contexts with negative and affirmative particles directly preceding the polarity item. To control for effects of the processing of negation as such, neutral adverbs were also presented in negative and affirmative contexts. The results did not show any significant effect of negation for the non-polar adverbs, allowing context effects for polarity items to be interpreted as being due to the appropriateness of the context. Negative polarity violations elicited an N400 response that might reflect the lack of semantic congruity of the negative polarity item in an affirmative context. In contrast, processing positive polarity items in context of negation resulted in a positive effect resembling the P600, which may be considered as a marker of a different sort of integration difficulty caused by violation of licensing conditions and/or a search for a licensor in the wider discourse context. The study presented here is the first to show an unambiguous dissociation between responses to negative and positive polarity violations. This dissociation argues for different mechanisms underlying the processing of these two types of polarity; we propose that positive polarity items are sensitive to wider discourse context, while negative polarity items are more sensitive to local lexical context.