Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine whether or not the brain distinguishes between two types of conceptual relationships between noun-phrases (NPs) and verbs during online processing of simple, unambiguous English sentences. A total of 15 participants read and made plausibility judgments on sentences that were presented word-by-word. Event-related potentials elicited by critical verbs were measured. In all cases, the critical verb assigned a thematic role of ‘agent’ to its subject NP. In non-violated sentences (e.g. “For breakfast the boys would only eat…”), the preceding NP was animate (“boys”) and was a likely agent for a given verb (“eat”) given its preceding context (“For breakfast”). In both types of conceptually violated sentences, the NPs were unlikely agents for the verbs given their preceding contexts. In ‘thematic role animacy violations’ (e.g. “For breakfast the eggs would only eat…”), the NP was inanimate (“eggs”) and was therefore more likely to occupy the role of ‘theme’ than ‘agent’, i.e. eggs, being inanimate, cannot eat but they can be eaten. In ‘non-thematic role pragmatic violations’ (e.g. “For breakfast the boys would only bury…”), the thematic role of agent assigned by the verb (“bury”) to its preceding NP (“boys”) is inherently acceptable (boys can bury), but the sentence is still pragmatically incongruous given the preceding context (“At breakfast”). As expected, the non-thematic role pragmatic violations elicited a significant N400 effect. The thematic role animacy violations elicited a smaller N400 effect that only approached significance across all participants. The thematic role animacy violations, however, elicited a significant P600 effect—an ERP component that is most commonly associated with processing syntactic information during language comprehension. We discuss the possibility that the P600 was elicited by the thematic role animacy violations (but not by the non-thematic role pragmatic violations) because, in the former but not the latter, there was an online attempt to structurally repair and make sense of the sentences by reassigning the thematic role of the NP that preceded the critical verb from ‘agent’ to ‘theme’. Our findings suggest a qualitative neural distinction in processing these two types of conceptual anomalies within simple, unambiguous sentences.