E. Matthew Husband

E. Matthew Husband
Graduate Student

Psycholinguistics and Visual Cognition Lab
Department of Linguistics
Michigan State University

Advisor: Marcin Morzycki

Research Interests:

Syntax-Semantics Interface
Language Processing

Curriculum Vitae

General Research Questions:

How do linguistic theory and language processing link up?
- Since the supposed demise of the derivational theory of complexity, the link between these two areas of research has been unclear at best. The use of derivations is fundamental to linguistic theory while measures of processing complexity have remained the primary concern of language processing. For these two fields to ever have more than passing interest in one another, unification along the lines of a derivational theory of complexity should be pursued. The initial unification via the derivational theory of complexity may have been premature, but changes within both fields have now opened up prospects for new inquiry. Sentence-level transformations such as the passive have been dissolved into more local and universal computations, while online techniques sensitive to moment by moment processing are now able to reveal fine-grained difference between structures. This collapse of grain size in both areas suggests that new inquiry into derivational theories of complexity may now be reasonable.
How are sentences interpreted?
- There are at least two interesting areas of concern here. Words are often unrestricted in their meaning, appearing in a host of different syntactic positions, and used in a variety of communicative situations. Structures, however, follow very strict syntactic distributions, and are equally strict in their interpretations. This first observation focuses on traditional areas of lexical semantics concerned with how words are interpreted. Here, I follow two positions. First, words themselves do not determine the structure, but instead are interpreted by the structures they are found in. This allows for a distinction between grammaticality and coercion, the later being regulated to extra-grammatical systems. Second, words by themselves do not refer, but instead may indicate the speaker's (often complex) perspective on the world--a perspective very much tied to particular instances of language use and again properly outside the linguistic system. The second observation focuses on compositional semantics. The main research question I consider asks to what extent semantic interpretation proceeds from syntactic structure. Here, I assume the strong position that prima facia syntax and semantics are one and the same; such that functional and substantial heads are put together in the syntax and that each unique structure delivers an interpretation specific to it in accord with compositional rules. Taking these positions allows for strong hypotheses about the extent of grammar and for its interaction with conceptual-intentional systems.
How are the computations for structure generated in the brain?
- I also investigate the neural response to particular linguistic structures using magnetoencephalography (MEG) which has excellent temporal resolution and good spatial resolution and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) which has excellent spatial temporal resolution. The neural correlates discovered with these two techniques form the basis for understanding both the distribution of a structure's computation over the cortex and the time-course in which that computation is realized. In the future, computational modeling of these signals may shed light on the sub-computations performed by specific neural tissues and circuits, thus broadening our understanding of the computational properties of the linguistic system specifically, and of the brain in general.

Manuscripts:

Husband, E.M. (in prep) Stage-level/Individual-level Predicates and Aspect.
Husband, E.M., Stockall, L., and Beretta, A. (submitted) VP-Internal Event Composition: Processing Evidence for Phrase-level Event Interpretation.
Husband, E.M., Stockall, L., and Beretta, A. (submitted) The Online Composition of Events.

Conference Presentations:

Husband, E.M. (2009) The Computation of Telicity. Talk given at Moving Beyond Truth Conditions: The Computation of Meaning (MayFest), May 8th-9th, University of Maryland, College Park. [link] [abstract] [slides]
Husband, E.M. & Zhu, D. (2008) Neural Correlates of Semantic Composition. Talk given at the Department of Radiology MRI and fMRI Research Seminar Series, April 9th, Michigan State University. [link]
Husband, E.M., Stockall, L., and Beretta, A. (2008) Mismatched Event Interpretations: Evidence from Eye Movements. Talk given at the Linguistic Society of America 82nd Annual Meeting, Chicago, IL. [abstract]
Husband, E.M. (2007) Plurality and Events: Unbounded Representations across Categories. Talk given at the Department of Linguistics Colloquium, Novemeber 15, Michigan State University. [abstract]
Husband, E.M. (2007) Stative Quantity. Talk given at Syntax Lunch, University of Maryland, College Park, MD. [abstract] [handout]
Husband, E.M. (2006) Stage-level/Individual-level Predicates and Aspect. Talk given at the First Midwest Workshop on Semantics, Chicago, IL. [abstract] [handout]
Husband, E.M., Beretta, A., and Stockall, L. (2006) Aspectual Computation: Evidence for Immediate Commitment. Talk given at Architectures and Mechanisms of Language Processing 12th Annual Conference, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. [abstract]
Husband, E.M., Stockall, L., and Beretta, A. (2006) Aspectual Computation: A Processing Perspective. Talk given at the Department of Linguistics Colloquium, March 30, Michigan State University. [abstract]
Husband, E.M. (2006) do Late Insertion: More Economical than Economy. Talk given at the Linguistic Society of America 80th Annual Meeting, Albuquerque, NM. [handout with commentary] [handout]

Poster Presentations:

Husband, E.M. and Zhu, D. (2009) Brain regions for sentence-level meanings: An fMRI study of complement coercion. Poster given at the 15th Annual Meeting of the Organization for Human Brain Mapping, June 18th-23rd, San Francisco, CA. [abstract] [poster]
Husband, E.M. and Zhu, D. (2009) Neural correlates of silent meaning: An fMRI study of complement coercion. Poster given at the 22st Annual CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing, Davis, CA. [abstract] [poster]
Husband, E.M., Stockall, L., and Beretta, A. (2008) Building Events: Online Investigations of Verbal and Nominal Contributions to Aktionsart. Poster given at Verb Concepts: Cognitive Science Perspectives on Verb Representation and Processing, October 3rd-4th, Concordia University, Montreal, CA. [abstract] [poster]
Husband, E.M., Stockall, L., and Beretta, A. (2008) VP-internal Computation of Events. Poster given at the 21st Annual CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing, Chapel Hill, NC. [abstract] [poster]
Stockall, L., Ferreria, F., Husband, E.M., and Fodor, J.D. (2006) Very Early Grammatical Error Detection: MEG Evdience. Poster presented at Cognitive Neuroscience Society Annual Meeting, San Francisco, CA. [poster]
Ferreira, F., Husband, E.M., and Patsenka, A.G. (2005) Unrepairable Garden-Paths Reveal Reanalysis Processing. Poster presented at Psychonomics 46th Annual Meeting, Toronto, Canada. [poster]
Husband, E.M. and C.N. Slobodochikoff. (2002) Analysis of Slope and Concavity in the Alarm Calls of Gunnisons's Prairie Dog (Cynomys gunnisoni). Poster presented at the Animal Behavior Society Meeting, Bloomington, IN.
Slobodchikoff, C.N. and Husband, E.M. (2001). Analysis of Slope and Curvature in Gunnison's Prairie Dog. Poster presented at the Research Experience for Undergraduates in Neural and Behavioral Sciences, Northern Arizona University (unpublished).
Ensor, D.D., Phillips, M.S., Husband, E.M., and Lisic, E.C. (2000). Determination of acid dissociation constances for a new bisphosphonic acid. Poster presented at the 219th American Chemical Society National Meeting, San Francisco, CA.