In this study, we investigated the neural oscillatory patterns occurring during sentence-level overt bilingual processing tasks on 46 German–English bilinguals with the intention of finding out if there were task-specific oscillations for this language pair.
Methodology:
Four tasks, including Language 2 (L2) listening, Language 1 (L1) speaking, L2 shadowing (i.e., repeating a segment of an utterance), and backward interpreting (i.e., orally translating L2 sentences to L1), were implemented with the technique of electroencephalography (EEG).
Data and analysis:
Data included demographic indices, neural oscillation metrics, and oral production scores from participants. Static spectral analysis, time–frequency analysis, principal components analysis, cross-frequency coupling, and inferential statistics were applied to the data.
Findings:
The sensory task and articulatory tasks differed greatly in the delta–theta band and the beta–gamma band in terms of time–frequency dynamics. Analyses also revealed variations in a frontal/prefrontal theta component and a distinct gamma component across the four tasks. Moreover, we found a right fronto-temporal theta–gamma coupling unique to backward interpreting.
Originality:
The task-wise comparison experiment paradigm has rarely been implemented in neuroimaging research on language, especially so in EEG research on bilingualism.
Significance:
The findings provide novel insights for the understanding of language conversion mechanism and may benefit the training of professional interpreters.
AltmannG. T. (2001). The language machine: Psycholinguistics in review. British Journal of Psychology, 92(1), 129–170.
2.
AnS.OhS. J.JunS. B.SungJ. E. (2022). Aging-related dissociation of spatial and temporal N400 in sentence-level semantic processing: Evidence from source analyses. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, 14, 877235.
3.
AxmacherN.MormannF.FernándezG.ElgerC. E.FellJ. (2006). Memory formation by neuronal synchronization. Brain Research Reviews, 52(1), 170–182.
4.
BabiloniC.MarzanoN.SoricelliA.CordoneS.Millán-CalentiJ. C.Del PercioC.BujánA. (2016). Cortical neural synchronization underlies primary visual consciousness of qualia: Evidence from event-related potentials. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 10, Article 310.
5.
BastiaansenM. C. M.HagoortP. (2015). Frequency-based segregation of syntactic and semantic unification during online sentence level language comprehension. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 27(11), 2095–2107. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_00829
6.
BastiaansenM. C. M.MagyariL.HagoortP. (2010). Syntactic unification operations are reflected in oscillatory dynamics during on-line sentence comprehension. Journal Cognitive Neuroscience, 22(7), 1333–1347. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2009.21283
7.
BastiaansenM. C. M.OostenveldR.JensenO.HagoortP. (2008). I see what you mean: Theta power increases are involved in the retrieval of lexical semantic information. Brain and Language, 106(1), 15–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2007.10.006
8.
BastiaansenM. C. M.Van BerkumJ. J.HagoortP. (2002). Event-related theta power increases in the human EEG during online sentence processing. Neuroscience Letters, 323(1), 13–16.
9.
BastiaansenM. C. M.Van Der LindenM.Ter KeursM.DijkstraT.HagoortP. (2005). Theta responses are involved in lexical-semantic retrieval during language processing. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17(3), 530–541.
10.
BemisD. K.PylkkänenL. (2013). Basic linguistic composition recruits the left anterior temporal lobe and left angular gyrus during both listening and reading. Cerebral Cortex, 23(8), 1859–1873. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhs170
11.
BergerH. (1929). About the electroencephalogram. Archive for Psychiatry and Nervous Diseases, 87, 527–570. (German).
12.
BonhageC. E.MeyerL.GruberT.FriedericiA. D.MuellerJ. L. (2017). Oscillatory EEG dynamics underlying automatic chunking during sentence processing. NeuroImage, 152, 647–657.
13.
Bornkessel-SchlesewskyI.StaubA.SchlesewskyM. (2016). The timecourse of sentence processing in the brain. In HickokG.SmallS. L. (Eds.), Neurobiology of language (pp. 607–620). Academic Press.
14.
BosmanC. A.LansinkC. S.PennartzC. M. (2014). Functions of gamma-band synchronization in cognition: From single circuits to functional diversity across cortical and subcortical systems. European Journal of Neuroscience, 39(11), 1982–1999. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejn.12606
15.
BrennanJ.NirY.HassonU.MalachR.HeegerD. J.PylkkänenL. (2012). Syntactic structure building in the anterior temporal lobe during natural story listening. Brain and Language, 120(2), 163–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2010.04.002
16.
CanoltyR. T.KnightR. T. (2010). The functional role of cross-frequency coupling. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 14(11), 506–515.
17.
CohenM. X. (2014). Analyzing neural time series data: Theory and practice. MIT Press.
18.
DaltrozzoJ.WiolandN.KotchoubeyB. (2012). The N400 and late positive complex (LPC) effects reflect controlled rather than automatic mechanisms of sentence processing. Brain Sciences, 2(3), 267–297.
19.
DeloguF.BrouwerH.CrockerM. W. (2019). Event-related potentials index lexical retrieval (N400) and integration (P600) during language comprehension. Brain and Cognition, 135, 103569.
20.
DelormeA.MakeigS. (2004). EEGLAB: An open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 134(1), 9–21.
21.
DijkstraT. O. N.WahlA.BuytenhuijsF.Van HalemN.Al-JibouriZ.De KorteM.RekkéS. (2019). Multilink: A computational model for bilingual word recognition and word translation. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 22(4), 657–679.
22.
Di LibertoG. M.O’SullivanJ. A.LalorE. C. (2015). Low-frequency cortical entrainment to speech reflects phoneme-level processing. Current Biology, 25(19), 2457–2465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2015.08.030
23.
DudschigC.MaienbornC.KaupB. (2016). Is there a difference between stripy journeys and stripy ladybirds? The N400 response to semantic and world-knowledge violations during sentence processing. Brain and Cognition, 103, 38–49.
24.
DussiasP.DietrichA.VillegasÁ. (2015). Cross-language interactions during bilingual sentence processing. In SchwieterJ. W. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of bilingual processing (pp. 349–366). Cambridge University Press.
25.
FedorenkoE.ScottT. L.BrunnerP.CoonW. G.PritchettB.SchalkG.KanwisherN. (2016). Neural correlate of the construction of sentence meaning. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(41), E6256–E6262. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1612132113
26.
FerreeT. C.LuuP.RussellG. S.TuckerD. M. (2001). Scalp electrode impedance, infection risk, and EEG data quality. Clinical Neurophysiology, 112(3), 536–544.
27.
FlickG.PylkkänenL. (2020). Isolating syntax in natural language: MEG evidence for an early contribution of left posterior temporal cortex. Cortex, 127, 42–57.
28.
FrankS. L. (2021). Toward computational models of multilingual sentence processing. Language Learning, 71(Suppl. 1), 193–218.
29.
FriedericiA. D. (1995). The time course of syntactic activation during language processing: A model based on neuropsychological and neurophysiological data. Brain and Language, 50(3), 259–281.
30.
FriedericiA. D. (1999). The neurobiology of language comprehension. In FriedericiA. D. (Ed.), Language comprehension: A biological perspective (pp. 263–301). Springer.
31.
FriedericiA. D. (2002). Towards a neural basis of auditory sentence processing. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6(2), 78–84.
32.
FriedericiA. D. (2009). Pathways to language: Fiber tracts in the human brain. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13(4), 175–181.
33.
FriedericiA. D. (2011). The brain basis of language processing: From structure to function. Physiological Reviews, 91(4), 1357–1392.
34.
FriedericiA. D.KotzS. A.ScottS. K.ObleserJ. (2010). Disentangling syntax and intelligibility in auditory language comprehension. Human Brain Mapping, 31(3), 448–457. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.20878
35.
FriesP. (2005). A mechanism for cognitive dynamics: Neuronal communication through neuronal coherence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(10), 474–480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2005.08.011
36.
GrabnerR. H.BrunnerC.LeebR.NeuperC.PfurtschellerG. (2007). Event-related EEG theta and alpha band oscillatory responses during language translation. Brain Research Bulletin, 72(1), 57–65.
37.
HagoortP. (2003). How the brain solves the binding problem for language: A neurocomputational model of syntactic processing. NeuroImage, 20, S18–S29.
38.
HagoortP. (2005). On Broca, brain, and binding: A new framework. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(9), 416–423.
39.
HagoortP. (2013). MUC (memory, unification, control) and beyond. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, Article 416.
40.
HagoortP. (2016). MUC (Memory, Unification, Control): A model on the neurobiology of language beyond single word processing. In HickokG.SmallS. L. (Eds.), Neurobiology of language (pp. 339–347). Academic Press.
HaldL. A.BastiaansenM. C.HagoortP. (2006). EEG theta and gamma responses to semantic violations in online sentence processing. Brain and Language, 96(1), 90–105.
43.
KarakaşS.BarryR. J. (2017). A brief historical perspective on the advent of brain oscillations in the biological and psychological disciplines. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 75, 335–347.
44.
KleinD.MilnerB.ZatorreR. J.MeyerE.EvansA. C. (1995). The neural substrates underlying word generation: A bilingual functional-imaging study. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 92(7), 2899–2903.
45.
KurzI. (1995). Watching the brain at work-an exploratory study of EEG changes during Simultaneous Interpreting (SI). The Interpreters’ Newsletter, 6(2), 3–16.
46.
LaraG. A.AlekseichukI.TuriZ.LehrA.AntalA.PaulusW. (2018). Perturbation of theta-gamma coupling at the temporal lobe hinders verbal declarative memory. Brain Stimulation, 11(3), 509–517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brs.2017.12.007
47.
LegaB. C.JacobsJ.KahanaM. (2012). Human hippocampal theta oscillations and the formation of episodic memories. Hippocampus, 22(4), 748–761. https://doi.org/10.1002/hipo.20937
48.
LeibergS.LutzenbergerW.KaiserJ. (2006). Effects of memory load on cortical oscillatory activity during auditory pattern working memory. Brain Research, 1120(1), 131–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2006.08.066
49.
LeongV.GoswamiU. (2014). Assessment of rhythmic entrainment at multiple timescales in dyslexia: Evidence for disruption to syllable timing. Hearing Research, 308, 141–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2013.07.015
50.
LewisR. L.VasishthS. (2005). A hypothesis about serial order information in parsing (that yields a novel explanation of center-embedding difficulty). In Proceedings of the CUNY sentence processing conference. University of Arizona.
51.
LiuH.ZhangM.PérezA.XieN.LiB.LiuQ. (2019). Role of language control during interbrain phase synchronization of cross-language communication. Neuropsychologia, 131, 316–324.
52.
LuoY.ZhangY.FengX.ZhouX. (2010). Electroencephalogram oscillations differentiate semantic and prosodic processes during sentence reading. Neuroscience, 169(2), 654–664. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2010.05.032
53.
MaiG.MinettJ. W.WangW. S.-Y. (2016). Delta, theta, beta, and gamma brain oscillations index levels of auditory sentence processing. NeuroImage, 133, 516–528.
54.
MarisE.OostenveldR. (2007). Nonparametric statistical testing of EEG-and MEG-data. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 164(1), 177–190.
55.
MatarS.DiraniJ.MarantzA.PylkkänenL. (2021). Left posterior temporal cortex is sensitive to syntax within conceptually matched Arabic expressions. Scientific Reports, 11(1), 7181.
56.
MeyerL. (2018). The neural oscillations of speech processing and language comprehension: state of the art and emerging mechanisms. European Journal of Neuroscience, 48(7), 2609–2621. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejn.13748
57.
MeyerL.ObleserJ.FriedericiA. D. (2013). Left parietal alpha enhancement during working memory-intensive sentence processing. Cortex, 49(3), 711–721.
58.
NowakM.ZichC.StaggC. J. (2018). Motor Cortical Gamma Oscillations: What Have We Learnt and Where Are We Headed?Current Behavioral Neuroscience Reports, 5(2), 136–142. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40473-018-0151-z
59.
OvansZ.HsuN. S.Bell-SouderD.GilleyP.NovickJ. M.KimA. E. (2022). Cognitive control states influence real-time sentence processing as reflected in the P600 ERP. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 37(8), 939–947.
60.
ParkJ. Y.JhungK.LeeJ.AnS. K. (2013). Theta-gamma coupling during a working memory task as compared to a simple vigilance task. Neuroscience Letters, 532, 39–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2012.10.061
61.
PeñaM.MelloniL. (2012). Brain oscillations during spoken sentence processing. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 24(5), 1149–1164.
62.
PenolazziB.AngrilliA.JobR. (2009). Gamma EEG activity induced by semantic violation during sentence reading. Neuroscience Letters, 465(1), 74–78.
63.
PenolazziB.SpironelliC.VioC.AngrilliA. (2010). Brain plasticity in developmental dyslexia after phonological treatment: a beta EEG band study. Behavioural Brain Research, 209(1), 179–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2010.01.029
64.
PetscheH.EtlingerS. C.FilzO. (1993). Brain electrical mechanisms of bilingual speech management: an initial investigation. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 86(6), 385–394.
65.
PijnackerJ.DavidsN.van WeerdenburgM.VerhoevenL.KnoorsH.van AlphenP. (2017). Semantic processing of sentences in preschoolers with specific language impairment: Evidence from the N400 effect. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 60(3), 627–639.
66.
PowerA. J.MeadN.BarnesL.GoswamiU. (2012). Neural entrainment to rhythmically presented auditory, visual, and audio-visual speech in children. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00216
67.
ReitererS.HemmelmannC.RappelsbergerP.BergerM. L. (2005). Characteristic functional networks in high-versus low-proficiency second language speakers detected also during native language processing: an explorative EEG coherence study in 6 frequency bands. Cognitive Brain Research, 25(2), 566–578.
68.
ReitererS.PeredaE.BhattacharyaJ. (2009). Measuring second language proficiency with EEG synchronization: how functional cortical networks and hemispheric involvement differ as a function of proficiency level in second language speakers. Second Language Research, 25(1), 77–106.
69.
RogalskyC.RongF.SaberiK.HickokG. (2011). Functional anatomy of language and music perception: Temporal and structural factors investigated using functional magnetic resonance imaging. Journal of Neuroscience, 31(10), 3843–3852.
70.
ShahinA. J.PictonT. W.MillerL. M. (2009). Brain oscillations during semantic evaluation of speech. Brain and Cognition, 70(3), 259–266. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2009.02.008
71.
TimofeevI.BazhenovM.SeigneurJ.SejnowskiT. (2012). Neuronal synchronization and thalamocortical rhythms in sleep, wake and epilepsy. In Jasper’s basic mechanisms of the epilepsies (4th ed.).
72.
TuckerD. M. (1993). Spatial sampling of head electrical fields: the geodesic sensor net. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 87(3), 154–163.
73.
van der BurghtC. L.NumssenO.SchlaakB.GouchaT.HartwigsenG. (2023). Differential contributions of inferior frontal gyrus subregions to sentence processing guided by intonation. Human Brain Mapping, 44(2), 585–598.
74.
VarelaF.LachauxJ. P.RodriguezE.MartinerieJ. (2001). The brainweb: Phase synchronization and large-scale integration. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 2(4), 229–239. https://doi.org/10.1038/35067550
75.
VassileiouB.MeyerL.BeeseC.FriedericiA. D. (2018). Alignment of alpha-band desynchronization with syntactic structure predicts successful sentence comprehension. NeuroImage, 175, 286–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2018.04.008
76.
WagnerM.WatsonD. G. (2010). Experimental and theoretical advances in prosody: A review. Language and Cognitive Processes, 25(7–9), 905–945. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690961003589492
77.
WangJ.GaoD.LiD.DesrochesA. S.LiuL.LiX. (2014). Theta-gamma coupling reflects the interaction of bottom-up and top-down processes in speech perception in children. NeuroImage, 102(Pt. 2), 637–645. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.08.030
78.
WangL.HagoortP.JensenO. (2018). Language prediction is reflected by coupling between frontal gamma and posterior alpha oscillations. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 30(3), 432–447.
79.
WeissS.MuellerH. (2012). “Too Many betas do not Spoil the Broth”: The Role of Beta Brain Oscillations in Language Processing [Review]. Frontiers in Psychology, 3. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00201
80.
WinklerI.HaufeS.TangermannM. (2011). Automatic classification of artifactual ICA-components for artifact removal in EEG signals. Behavioral and Brain Functions, 7, 1–15.
81.
ZhuZ.HouX.YangY. (2018). Reduced syntactic processing efficiency in older adults during sentence comprehension. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, Article 243.
