ArticleNeurobiology of language (Cambridge, Mass.)2024
Lexical Surprisal Shapes the Time Course of Syntactic Structure Building.
Article in Neurobiology of language (Cambridge, Mass.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Functional identification of language-responsive sensors in individual participants in MEG investigations.Journal of neurophysiology · 2026Article
- Shared Neural Computations for Syntactic and Morphological Structures: Evidence From Mandarin Chinese.Cognitive science · 2026Article
- Language-specific neural dynamics extend syntax into the time domain.PLoS biology · 2025Article
- What's Surprising About Surprisal.Computational brain & behavior · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
When we understand language, we recognize words and combine them into sentences. In this article, we explore the hypothesis that listeners use probabilistic information about words to build syntactic structure. Recent work has shown that lexical probability and syntactic structure both modulate the delta-band (<4 Hz) neural signal. Here, we investigated whether the neural encoding of syntactic structure changes as a function of the distributional properties of a word. To this end, we analyzed MEG data of 24 native speakers of Dutch who listened to three fairytales with a total duration of 49 min. Using temporal response functions and a cumulative model-comparison approach, we evaluated the contributions of syntactic and distributional features to the variance in the delta-band neural signal. This revealed that lexical surprisal values (a distributional feature), as well as bottom-up node counts (a syntactic feature) positively contributed to the model of the delta-band neural signal. Subsequently, we compared responses to the syntactic feature between words with high- and low-surprisal values. This revealed a delay in the response to the syntactic feature as a consequence of the surprisal value of the word: high-surprisal values were associated with a delayed response to the syntactic feature by 150-190 ms. The delay was not affected by word duration, and did not have a lexical origin. These findings suggest that the brain uses probabilistic information to infer syntactic structure, and highlight an importance for the role of time in this process.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.