Syntactic processing engages the semantic control network.

Overview

1. State Key Laboratory of Cognitive Neuroscience and Learning & IDG/McGovern Institute for Brain Research, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China
2. Department of Psychology, University of York, Heslington, Yorkshire, United Kingdom

Abstract

The relationship between semantics and syntax is highly contested. Neuroimaging evidence has offered conflicting views on whether these domains are neurally separable, in part because prior work has not distinguished two key components of semantic cognition: semantic representation and semantic control. In this study, we conducted an activation likelihood estimation (ALE) meta-analysis to identify regions consistently engaged by more versus less demanding syntactic processing, and compared these directly with regions recruited by more versus less demanding semantic processing. Demanding syntactic processing engaged regions across the semantic control network (SCN), including the inferior frontal gyrus (IFG) and insula (particularly on the left), left posterior temporal cortex (posterior superior temporal sulcus and middle temporal gyrus), and bilateral dorsomedial prefrontal cortex. No regions outside the SCN responded significantly more to syntactic demands than semantic control. Within the SCN, there was significantly less reliable activation for syntactic than for semantic control demands in some anterior (pars triangularis) and ventral (pars orbitalis) portions of the left IFG and a region in posterior fusiform and inferior temporal gyrus. Greater involvement for syntax than semantic control was identified in a small region of posterior left IFG (pars opercularis) within the SCN. Moreover, both controlled semantic and syntactic processing showed multimodal responses to auditory and visual stimuli in the left IFG and posterior temporal cortex (PTC). Together, these findings suggest that syntactic processing is distinct from semantic representation, yet demanding syntax engages portions of the SCN, reflecting a shared need to access and manipulate stored semantic knowledge for flexible, context-sensitive use.

Reproduced under the paper's license (CC BY), from the paper cited above.

Code

The paper links to its data, not to its authors' code: see the Data section.

The paper's code and data availability statement is in the Data section.

Tracing map

A tracing map links a paper to the code its authors published: this paper has none, so it has no map.

Data

Datasets cited

• github.com/qianwenchang/syntax_semanticcontrol_meta, at github.com; found in “Data and Code Availability”

Data and Code Availability

All data are provided in the Supplementary Materials (https://doi.org/10.1162/IMAG.a.1281#supplementary-data), and the syntax meta-analysis results are available online at https://github.com/QianwenChang/Syntax_SemanticControl_Meta.

Reproduced under the paper's license (CC BY), from the paper cited above.

Versions

The history of this record: each version stored by the harvester or made by a correction of its authors or of the maintainers of its code, and what changed in its facts. The texts of the paper (its abstract, its availability statements) are not part of it; versions that changed only those are not listed.

Version 1, 27 September 2026: the first record

Recorded: type, language, journal, volume, pages, dates, 3 authors, 4 keywords, 87 references.

Cite

This paper

Chang, Q., Jefferies, E., & Jackson, R. L. (2026). Syntactic processing engages the semantic control network. Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.), 4, IMAG.a.1281. https://doi.org/10.1162/imag.a.1281

Similar papers

The papers with a page that share the most with this one: the tools found in their code, their categories, datasets, cited references and authors, the rarest counting most.

[1] doi:10.1002/hbm.70536 [code]

The Neural Processes Underpinning Flexible Semantic Retrieval in Visual and Auditory Modalities.

Journal: Human brain mapping

In common: 15 references

[2] doi:10.1038/s41467-026-75841-9 [code]

Model-based semantic distance reveals adaptive coordination of distinct cognitive systems in flexible knowledge retrieval.

Journal: Nature communications

In common: 13 references

[3] doi:10.1038/s41467-026-76598-x

Preserved topography, lateralization, selectivity, and functional connectivity of the language network in older brains.

Journal: Nature communications

In common: 10 references

[4] doi:10.1162/nol.a.244 [code]

A Novel Approach to Map the Causal Impact of Brain Stimulation on Semantic Processing With Language Models.

Journal: Neurobiology of language (Cambridge, Mass.)

In common: 7 references

[5] doi:10.1162/imag.a.1246 [code]

A 3.5-minute-long reading-based fMRI localizer for the language network.

Journal: Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)

In common: 7 references

[6] doi:10.1126/sciadv.aec0518 [code]

Hybrid spatial organization and evidence for magnitude-independent neural coding of linguistic information during sentence production.

Journal: Science advances

In common: systems, 6 references

[7] doi: [code]

Neural Correlates of Inhibitory Control in Impulsivity Traits in Non-Ecological Human–Computer Tasks: An ALE Meta-Analysis

Journal: Brain sciences

In common: 6 references

[8] doi:10.1162/imag.a.1283 [code]

The language network responds robustly to sentences across tasks.

Journal: Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)

In common: 6 references

[9] doi:10.3758/s13423-026-02939-y

Rational numbers: A systematic review and ALE meta-analysis of the neuroimaging of fraction and decimal processing in the brain.

Journal: Psychonomic bulletin & review

In common: 6 references

[10] doi:10.1016/j.isci.2026.116704

Domain-general and language-specific brain networks are differentially associated with verbal intelligence during development.

Journal: iScience

In common: 6 references

Contribute

The authors of this paper can claim it, correct its record and validate its tracing map, and the maintainers of its code (its owner, or a public member of its organization) correct what it says of their repository; anyone signed in can ask for its removal. Every request goes to OSCR's own machine, which answers it; your account page follows them.

Request its removal

To ask OSCR to remove this record, the copies of its authors' scripts or its tracing map, use the removal request page: signed in, you say who you are, what to remove and why, then review and confirm the request. Published rules decide every request (how).

Discussion: questions and error reports about this paper and its code, from signed-in readers and its authors. It opens with sign-in.

Reproductions: reports from readers who ran the authors' code: what they reproduced, with which environment, commit and data. It opens with sign-in.

Activity: what happens around this paper: new versions of its record, its map's validation, discussions and reproductions. It opens with sign-in.