Language and Computation in Neural Systems Group, Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Donders Centre for Cognitive Neuroimaging, Radboud University, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
PLoS Comput Biol. 2022 Jul 28;18(7):e1010269. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1010269. eCollection 2022 Jul.
Sentences contain structure that determines their meaning beyond that of individual words. An influential study by Ding and colleagues (2016) used frequency tagging of phrases and sentences to show that the human brain is sensitive to structure by finding peaks of neural power at the rate at which structures were presented. Since then, there has been a rich debate on how to best explain this pattern of results with profound impact on the language sciences. Models that use hierarchical structure building, as well as models based on associative sequence processing, can predict the neural response, creating an inferential impasse as to which class of models explains the nature of the linguistic computations reflected in the neural readout. In the current manuscript, we discuss pitfalls and common fallacies seen in the conclusions drawn in the literature illustrated by various simulations. We conclude that inferring the neural operations of sentence processing based on these neural data, and any like it, alone, is insufficient. We discuss how to best evaluate models and how to approach the modeling of neural readouts to sentence processing in a manner that remains faithful to cognitive, neural, and linguistic principles.
句子的结构决定了其意义,而不仅仅是单个单词的意义。丁等(2016)的一项有影响力的研究使用短语和句子的频率标记来表明,人类大脑通过以结构呈现的速度在神经功率上找到峰值,从而对结构敏感。从那时起,关于如何最好地解释这种模式的结果,以及对语言科学产生深远影响的结果,就展开了丰富的争论。使用层次结构构建的模型,以及基于联想序列处理的模型,可以预测神经反应,从而在解释反映在神经读数中的语言计算的本质方面产生了推断上的僵局,即哪类模型解释了语言计算的本质。在当前的手稿中,我们讨论了各种模拟所说明的文献中得出的结论中存在的陷阱和常见谬论。我们的结论是,仅基于这些神经数据推断句子处理的神经操作,以及任何类似的操作,都是不够的。我们讨论了如何最好地评估模型,以及如何以一种仍然忠实于认知、神经和语言原则的方式处理句子处理的神经读数建模。