Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33497384›Full record

ArticlePLoS biology2021

Neural signatures of syntactic variation in speech planning.

Sebastian Sauppe, Kamal K Choudhary, Nathalie Giroud, Damián E Blasi, Elisabeth Norcliffe, Shikha Bhattamishra, Mahima Gulati, Aitor Egurtzegi, Ina Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, Martin Meyer and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Slow Oscillation-Spindle Coupling Predicts Sequence-Based Language Learning.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. The Agent Preference in Visual Event Apprehension.Open mind : discoveries in cognitive science · 2023
    Article
  9. Review
  10. 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

11 authors.

Sebastian SauppeDepartment of Comparative Language Science, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-8670-8197
Kamal K ChoudharyDepartment of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Ropar, Rupnagar, India.
Nathalie GiroudDepartment of Computational Linguistics, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Damián E BlasiHuman Evolutionary Biology Department, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-9885-1414
Elisabeth NorcliffeDepartment of Psychology, University of York, York, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.ORCID 0000-0001-8646-6474
Shikha BhattamishraDepartment of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Ropar, Rupnagar, India.
Mahima GulatiDepartment of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Ropar, Rupnagar, India.
Aitor EgurtzegiDepartment of Comparative Language Science, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-2766-4734
Ina Bornkessel-SchlesewskySchool of Psychology, Social Work and Social Policy, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia.
Martin MeyerCenter for the Interdisciplinary Study of Language Evolution (ISLE), University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Balthasar BickelDepartment of Comparative Language Science, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-9087-0565

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Planning to speak is a challenge for the brain, and the challenge varies between and within languages. Yet, little is known about how neural processes react to these variable challenges beyond the planning of individual words. Here, we examine how fundamental differences in syntax shape the time course of sentence planning. Most languages treat alike (i.e., align with each other) the 2 uses of a word like "gardener" in "the gardener crouched" and in "the gardener planted trees." A minority keeps these formally distinct by adding special marking in 1 case, and some languages display both aligned and nonaligned expressions. Exploiting such a contrast in Hindi, we used electroencephalography (EEG) and eye tracking to suggest that this difference is associated with distinct patterns of neural processing and gaze behavior during early planning stages, preceding phonological word form preparation. Planning sentences with aligned expressions induces larger synchronization in the theta frequency band, suggesting higher working memory engagement, and more visual attention to agents than planning nonaligned sentences, suggesting delayed commitment to the relational details of the event. Furthermore, plain, unmarked expressions are associated with larger desynchronization in the alpha band than expressions with special markers, suggesting more engagement in information processing to keep overlapping structures distinct during planning. Our findings contrast with the observation that the form of aligned expressions is simpler, and they suggest that the global preference for alignment is driven not by its neurophysiological effect on sentence planning but by other sources, possibly by aspects of production flexibility and fluency or by sentence comprehension. This challenges current theories on how production and comprehension may affect the evolution and distribution of syntactic variants in the world's languages.

Indexed as

LanguageAcoustic StimulationAdolescentAdultAttentionBrainComprehensionElectroencephalographyEvoked PotentialsFemaleHumansIndiaLinguisticsMaleMemory, Short-TermNerve Net

Identifiers

PMID33497384
PMCPMC7837500

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.