HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Hammer, A. Articles by Münte, T. F. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Hammer, A. Articles by Münte, T. F.

Pronominal Reference in Sentences about Persons or Things: An Electrophysiological Approach

Maastricht University, The Netherlands

Monique Lamers

University of Nijmegen, The Netherlands

Thomas F. Münte

Otto-von-Guericke-Universität, Magdeburg, Germany

German pronouns (er_{MALE/masculine}, sie_{FEMALE/feminine}) that refer to a person are determined by the biological gender (MALE/FEMALE) and/or syntactic gender (masculine/feminine) of the person. Pronouns (er_masculine, sie_feminine) that refer to a thing are determined by the syntactic gender of this thing (Garten [garden]_masculine, Tasche [hand-bag]_feminine). The study aimed to investigate whether semantic integration, syntactic integration, or both are involved in establishing co-reference between pronoun and subject/antecedent in sentences. Here we focused on two event-related potential components: the SPS/P600, related to syntactic violation and reanalysis, and the N400 component, related to semantic integration problems. In one condition, a person was introduced as antecedent and later referred to by a pronoun, which either agreed in biological/syntactic gender or not (biological/syntactic gender violation). In a second condition, a thing was introduced as antecedent and the corresponding pronoun either agreed in syntactic gender or not (syntactic gender violation). Results at critical pronouns showed a P600 effect for incongruent compared with congruent pronouns in both conditions with a centro-parietal maximum. This effect was larger for the person compared to the thing condition. We interpreted this finding as reflecting a syntactic integration process that can be influenced by conceptual/semantic and syntactic information of the antecedent type. Furthermore, at the word following the pronoun, we observed an N400 for the thing but not for the person condition. We suggest, supported by the results of a control experiment, that this effect reflects continuous integration processes for things, whereas for persons the integration seems to be finished at pronoun position.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				R. Filik, A. J. Sanford, and H. Leuthold Processing Pronouns without Antecedents: Evidence from Event-related Brain Potentials. J. Cogn. Neurosci., July 1, 2008; 20(7): 1315 - 1326. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]