Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31840587›Full record

ArticlePhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2020

Neural basis of basic composition: what we have learned from the red-boat studies and their extensions.

Liina Pylkkänen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Decoding the Neural Dynamics of Headed Syntactic Structure Building.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  4. Neural encoding of semantic structures during sentence production.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Diverging neural dynamics for syntactic structure building in naturalistic speaking and listening.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Dimensionality and Ramping: Signatures of Sentence Integration in the Dynamics of Brains and Deep Language Models.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Lexico-semantics obscures lexical syntax.Frontiers in language sciences · 2023
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Minimal Phrase Composition Revealed by Intracranial Recordings.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Liina PylkkänenDepartment of Linguistics, New York University, New York, NY, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Language is our mind's most powerful generative system for the expression of meaning and thought. What are the neural mechanisms of our ability to compose complex meanings from simpler representations? This question is impossible to answer unless we decompose the notion of 'meaning composition' in some theoretically guided way and then begin to assess the extent to which brain activity tracks the posited subroutines. Here, I summarize results from a body of MEG research that has begun to address this question from the ground up, first focusing on simple combinations of two words. The work sets off with a hypothesis space offered by theoretical linguistics, positing syntactic and logico-semantic composition as the main combinatory routines, but then reveals that the most consistent and prominent reflection of composition, localized in the left anterior temporal cortex at 200-250 ms, cannot be described with this toolkit. Instead, this activity tracks a much more conceptually driven process, robustly sensitive to the density of the conceptual feature space of the composing items. I will describe our functional understanding of this activity and how it may operate within a broader 'combinatory network.' This article is part of the theme issue 'Towards mechanistic models of meaning composition'.

Indexed as

SemanticsBrain MappingComprehensionConcept FormationHumansLanguageLearningLinguisticsMagnetoencephalographyTemporal Lobeconceptual combinationleft anterior temporal lobemagnetoencephalographysemanticssyntax

Identifiers

PMID31840587
PMCPMC6939357

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.