Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39554006›Full record

ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2025

Decoding words during sentence production: Syntactic role encoding and structure-dependent dynamics revealed by ECoG.

Adam M Morgan, Orrin Devinsky, Werner K Doyle, Patricia Dugan, Daniel Friedman, Adeen Flinker

Abstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Adam M MorganNeurology Department, NYU Grossman School of Medicine.ORCID 0000-0002-6046-526X
Orrin DevinskyNeurosurgery Department, NYU Grossman School of Medicine.
Werner K DoyleNeurology Department, NYU Grossman School of Medicine.
Patricia DuganNeurology Department, NYU Grossman School of Medicine.
Daniel FriedmanNeurology Department, NYU Grossman School of Medicine.
Adeen FlinkerNeurology Department, NYU Grossman School of Medicine.

Funding

Diagnostic validity and safety of high-gamma language mapping with intracranial EEGR01NS115929 · NINDS · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI Ravindra Arya, NATHAN E CRONE · 2020 to 2026
$3.9M
Characterizing the temporal processing of speech in the human auditory cortexR01DC018805 · NIDCD · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI FLINKER, ADEEN, MESGARANI, NIMA · 2021 to 2025
$3.3M
Spatiotemporal Organization of the Inferior Frontal Gyrus During Speech Production - Resubmission - 1R01NS109367 · NINDS · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI FLINKER, ADEEN · 2019 to 2023
$2.8M
Syntactic control of lexical activation during speech production - Resubmission - 1F32DC019533 · NIDCD · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI MORGAN, ADAM M · 2022 to 2024
$218k
NIDCD NIH HHS F32 DC019533NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC018805NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS109367NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS115929
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sentence production is the uniquely human ability to transform complex thoughts into strings of words. Despite the importance of this process, language production research has primarily focused on single words. However, it remains a largely untested assumption that the principles of word production generalize to more naturalistic utterances like sentences. Here, we investigate this using high-resolution neurosurgical recordings (ECoG) and an overt production experiment where patients produced six words in isolation (picture naming) and in sentences (scene description). We trained machine learning classifiers to identify the unique brain activity patterns for each word during picture naming, and used these patterns to decode which words patients were processing while they produced sentences. Our findings confirm that words share cortical representations across tasks, but reveal a division of labor within the language network. In sensorimotor cortex, words were consistently activated in the order in which they were said in the sentence. However, in inferior and middle frontal gyri (IFG and MFG), the order in which words were processed depended on the syntactic structure of the sentence. Deeper analysis of this pattern revealed a spatial code for representing a word's position in the sentence, with subjects selectively encoded in IFG and objects in MFG. Finally, we argue that the processes we observe in prefrontal cortex may impose a subtle pressure on language evolution, explaining why nearly all the world's languages position subjects before objects.

Indexed as

brain decodingECoGlanguagelexical representationspeech production

Identifiers

PMID39554006
PMCPMC11565881

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-ND
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.