HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Pylkkänen, L. Articles by Murphy, G. L. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Pylkkänen, L. Articles by Murphy, G. L.

The Representation of Polysemy: MEG Evidence

¹ New York University, ² New York University School of Medicine

Reprint requests should be sent to Liina Pylkkänen, Department of Linguistics, New York University, 719 Broadway, 4th Floor, New York, NY 10003, or via e-mail: liina.pylkkanen{at}nyu.edu.

Most words in natural language are polysemous, that is, they can be used in more than one way. For example, paper can be used to refer to a substance made out of wood pulp or to a daily publication printed on that substance. Although virtually every sentence contains polysemy, there is little agreement as to how polysemy is represented in the mental lexicon. Do different uses of polysemous words involve access to a single representation or do our minds store distinct representations for each different sense? Here we investigated priming between senses with a combination of behavioral and magnetoencephalographic measures in order to test whether different senses of the same word involve identity or mere formal and semantic similarity. Our results show that polysemy effects are clearly distinct from similarity effects bilaterally. In the left hemisphere, sense-relatedness elicited shorter latencies of the M350 source, which has been hypothesized to index lexical activation. Concurrent activity in the right hemisphere, on the other hand, peaked later for sense-related than for unrelated target stimuli, suggesting competition between related senses. The obtained pattern of results supports models in which the representation of polysemy involves both representational identity and difference: Related senses connect to same abstract lexical representation, but are distinctly listed within that representation.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. Bedny, M. McGill, and S. L. Thompson-Schill Semantic Adaptation and Competition during Word Comprehension Cereb Cortex, February 27, 2008; (2008) bhn018v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. K. Friedrich and S. A. Kotz Event-related Potential Evidence of Form and Meaning Coding during Online Speech Recognition. J. Cogn. Neurosci., April 1, 2007; 19(4): 594 - 604. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]