Search

• The findings highlight the semantic relation and grammatical factor in the brain's representation of lexical ambiguities. • Compared to unambiguous words, homonyms and polysemous activate the inferior frontal gyri and posterior temporal region. • Compared to polysemous words, homonyms elicit increased activity in dorsal prefrontal and posterior parietal cortices. • Meanings of homonyms with different syntactic categories are represented distinctively in frontal and temporal cortices. In human languages, it is a common phenomenon for a single word to have multiple meanings. This study used fMRI to investigate how the brain processed different types of lexical ambiguity, and how it differentiated the meanings of ambiguous words. We focused on homonyms and polysemy that differed in the relatedness among multiple meanings. Participants (N = 35) performed a prime-target semantic relatedness task, where a specific meaning of an ambiguous word was primed. Results showed that homonyms elicited greater activation in bilateral dorsal prefrontal and posterior parietal cortices than polysemous words, suggesting that these regions may be more engaged in cognitive control when the meanings of ambiguous words are unrelated. Multivariate pattern analysis further revealed that meanings of homonyms with different syntactic categories were represented differently in the frontal and temporal cortices. The findings highlighted the importance of semantic relations and grammatical factors in the brain's representation of lexical ambiguities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Highlights: [•] Event-related fMRI investigated the contribution of the right hemisphere in linguistic tasks. [•] Bilateral involvement of the pars opercularis (Brodmann’s area 44). [•] Bilateral involvement of the supramarginal gyrus of the inferior parietal lobule. [•] Strong connections between areas 44 and 40 through SLF III. [•] Delineate anterior-posterior language processing system bilaterally. [•] Increased right hemisphere involvement during metaphorical interpretations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Event-related potentials (ERPs) were used to investigate the time-course of meaning activation of different types of ambiguous words. Unbalanced homonymous (“pen”), balanced homonymous (“panel”), metaphorically polysemous (“lip”), and metonymically polysemous words (“rabbit”) were used in a visual single-word priming delayed lexical decision task. The theoretical distinction between homonymy and polysemy was reflected in the N400 component. Homonymous words (balanced and unbalanced) showed effects of dominance/frequency with reduced N400 effects predominantly observed for dominant meanings. Polysemous words (metaphors and metonymies) showed effects of core meaning representation with both dominant and subordinate meanings showing reduced N400 effects. Furthermore, the division within polysemy, into metaphor and metonymy, was supported. Differences emerged in meaning activation patterns with the subordinate meanings of metaphor inducing differentially reduced N400 effects moving from left hemisphere electrode sites to right hemisphere electrode sites, potentially suggesting increased involvement of the right hemisphere in the processing of figurative meaning. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Unlike homophonous meanings, which are semantically unrelated (e.g., the use of bat to refer to a baseball bat and a flying rodent), polysemous meanings are systematically related to one another (e.g., the use of book, CD, and video to refer to physical objects, as in ‘the leather book’, or to the intellectual content they contain, as in ‘the profound book’). But do perceived relations among polysemous meanings reflect the presence of generative lexical or conceptual structures that permit the meanings of these words to shift? If so, these structures may also support children’s early representations of polysemous meanings. In four studies, we demonstrate (1) that four-year-old children can understand both the concrete and abstract meanings of words like book, (2) that when taught a novel label for one of these meanings, children can readily understand an extension of that label to the other meaning, and (3) that extension does not occur between two homophonous meanings, which share a common phonological form but are otherwise unrelated. We conclude that the polysemous meanings of words like book rely on a common representational base early in development, and suggest that this may be the result of foundational, generative properties of the lexicon or conceptual system. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: The present study investigated the abilities of left-hemisphere-damaged (LHD) non-fluent aphasic, right-hemisphere-damaged (RHD), and normal control individuals to access, in sentential biasing contexts, the multiple meanings of three types of ambiguous words, namely homonyms (e.g., “punch”), metonymies (e.g., “rabbit”), and metaphors (e.g., “star”). Furthermore, the predictions of the “suppression deficit” and “coarse semantic coding” hypotheses, which have been proposed to account for RH language function/dysfunction, were tested. Using an auditory semantic priming paradigm, ambiguous words were incorporated in dominant- or subordinate-biasing sentence-primes followed after a short (100ms) or long (1000ms) interstimulus interval (ISI) by dominant-meaning-related, subordinate-meaning-related or unrelated target words. For all three types of ambiguous words, both the effects of context and ISI were obvious in the performance of normal control subjects, who showed multiple meaning activation at the short ISI, but eventually, at the long ISI, contextually appropriate meaning selection. Largely similar performance was exhibited by the LHD non-fluent aphasic patients as well. In contrast, RHD patients showed limited effects of context, and no effects of the time-course of processing. In addition, although homonymous and metonymous words showed similar patterns of activation (i.e., both meanings were activated at both ISIs), RHD patients had difficulties activating the subordinate meanings of metaphors, suggesting a selective problem with figurative meanings. Although the present findings do not provide strong support for either the “coarse semantic coding” or the “suppression deficit” hypotheses, they are viewed as being more consistent with the latter, according to which RH damage leads to deficits suppressing alternative meanings of ambiguous words that become incompatible with the context. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Under the theoretical assumption that lexical ambiguity is not a homogeneous phenomenon, but rather that it is subdivided into two distinct types, namely homonymy and polysemy, the present study investigated whether these different types of lexical ambiguity are psychologically real. Four types of ambiguous words, homonymous words (e.g., “pen”), polysemous words with metaphorical extensions (e.g., “eye”), polysemous words with a count/mass metonymic extension (e.g., “turkey”), and polysemous words with a producer/product metonymic extension (e.g., “Dali”), were used in a cross-modal sentence-priming lexical decision task. Overall, the theoretical distinction between homonymy and polysemy was reflected in the results of the present study, which revealed differential processing depending on the type of ambiguity. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]