# Domain-general syntax: The crucial role of tool-use motor training to improve syntactic comprehension in language, in adults and children

Raphaël Py, Marie-Hélène Grosbras, Claudio Brozzoli, Marie Montant

► To cite this version:

Raphaël Py, Marie-Hélène Grosbras, Claudio Brozzoli, Marie Montant. Domain-general syntax: The crucial role of tool-use motor training to improve syntactic comprehension in language, in adults and children. Embodied and Situated Language Processing 2024, Oct 2024, Berlin, Germany. hal-04952928

HAL Id: hal-04952928

https://hal.science/hal-04952928v1

Submitted on 17 Feb 2025

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>
# Domain-general syntax

## The crucial role of tool-use motor training to improve syntactic comprehension in language, in adults and children

Raphaël Py¹,², Marie-Hélène Grosbras¹,², Claudio Brozzoli³,*, Marie Montant¹,²,*

¹ Institute of Language, Communication and the Brain; ² Centre de Recherche en Psychologie et Neurosciences, Aix-Marseille University; ³ Centre de Recherche en Neurosciences de Lyon, University of Lyon; * Equal contribution

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_4.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_6.png" /></figure>

### A domain-general syntax may support language and motor skills:

* The syntactic components of the two domains share **common brain substrate**.

* Processing of **language syntax** improves after motor training with a tool.

We aimed to qualify more precisely what aspects of this motor training can promote such **learning transfer**:

* **Experiment 1** was designed to disentangle the role of the Effector from the role of the Action Complexity.

* **Experiment 2** aimed to investigate whether this learning is present in children before or after syntactic skills reach maturity, namely at 9 vs 11 years of age.

### Syntactic task

The participant reads a sentence declined in one of the three types (A), then she/he reads one of the four corresponding affirmations (B) and responds true or false.

#### (A) Sentence type

<table><tr><td>Agent 1</td><td>A<sub>1</sub></td><td>The writer</td></tr><tr><td>Agent 2</td><td>A<sub>2</sub></td><td>The poet</td></tr><tr><td>Object</td><td>O</td><td>The paper</td></tr></table>

<table><tr><td>CC</td><td>SRC</td><td>ORC</td></tr><tr><td>The writer admires the poet and takes the paper</td><td>The writer that admires the poet takes the paper</td><td>The writer that the poet admires takes the paper</td></tr></table>

#### (B) Affirmation type (Two-Alternative Forced Choice)

<table><caption>Language performance before and after motor training (mean d' CC, SRC, ORC)</caption><tr><td colspan="3">[A<sub>1</sub>A<sub>2</sub>]<br>The writer admires the poet</td><td colspan="3">[A<sub>1</sub>O]<br>The writer takes the paper</td><td colspan="3">[A<sub>2</sub>A<sub>1</sub>]<br>The poet admires the writer</td><td colspan="3">[A<sub>2</sub>O]<br>The poet takes the paper</td></tr><tr><td>CC</td><td>SRC</td><td>ORC</td><td>CC</td><td>SRC</td><td>ORC</td><td>CC</td><td>SRC</td><td>ORC</td><td>CC</td><td>SRC</td><td>ORC</td></tr><tr><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✗</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✓</td><td>✗</td><td>✗</td><td>✓</td><td>✗</td><td>✗</td><td>✗</td></tr></table>

<figure><img src="image_7.png" /></figure>

Whole model: [Complexity × Effector × Timepoint × Sentence type]
► Interaction [Effector × Timepoint] is significant [$\chi^2$(1) = 4.80, P = 0.03]
► Tool [Pre, mean d' = 1.91 ± 0.04; Post, d' = 2.10 ± 0.05; P < 0.001, Tukey's post hoc test]
n = 56
(subjects d'g > 1.38)

<figure><img src="image_8.png" /><figcaption>Correlation between initial motor performance (mean RT in seconds) and initial language performance (d'g)</figcaption></figure>

Initial motor performance = mean RT in block 1 (out of 8); initial language performance = d'g in timepoint 1
n = 80

Faster performance in the tool-use motor task correlated to better linguistic syntax performance.
► [CT: r(18) = -0.44, p = 0.02]

* Language syntax performance was improved after tool use training, regardless of the level of Action Complexity.

* No effect was observed after bare-hand training.

* Before any training, syntactic abilities in language can be predicted by initial motor dexterity for performing complex actions with a tool.

CT = Complex Tool, ST = Simple Tool, CH = Complex Hand, SH = Simple Hand

Adults

<figure><img src="image_9.png" /><figcaption>Language performance before and after motor training (mean RT in seconds)</figcaption></figure>

Whole model: [Effector × Age × Timepoint × Sentence type]
► Interaction [Effector × Timepoint] is significant [$\chi^2$(1) = 8.06, P = 0.005]
► Tool [Pre, mean RT = 2.65 ± 0.09; Post, RT = 2.34 ± 0.10; P < 0.001, Tukey's post hoc test]
n = 50
(subjects accORC > 0.55)

<figure><img src="image_10.png" /><figcaption>Correlation between motor improvement (Δ % correct) and language improvement (Δ % correct)</figcaption></figure>

Motor improvement = Δ % correct<sub>(block 8 - block 1)</sub>; language improvement = Δ % correct<sub>(timepoint 2 - timepoint 1)</sub>
n = 80

A stronger improvement in the tool-use motor task correlated to a stronger improvement in the language syntax task.
► [CT: r(38) = 0.31, p = 0.02]

* Language syntax performance was improved after complex tool use training, regardless of the age.

* No effect was observed after bare-hand training.

* The participants' ability to progress in the complex motor task with a tool correlated with their ability to progress in the language task.

CT = Complex Tool, CH = Complex Hand
9 = 9 years-old, 11 = 11 years-old

<figure><img src="image_11.png" /></figure>

We obtained a learning transfer from the motor to the language task in the tool-use conditions. Children from 9 to 11 seemed to benefit from this learning transfer. Altogether, our results are in line with the idea of common domain-general syntactic processes.

* Thibault, S., Py, R., Gervasi, A. M., Salemme, R., Koun, E., Lövden, M., Boulenger, V., Roy, A. C., & Brozzoli, C. (2021). Tool use and language share syntactic processes and neural patterns in the basal ganglia. *Science*, 374(6569).

* Pulvermüller, F. (2014). The syntax of action. *Trends in Cognitive Sciences*, 18(5), 219-220.

* Martel, M., Fourneret, P., Finos, L., Schmitz, C., & Catherine Roy, A. (2020). Highs and Lows in Motor Control Development. *Journal of Motor Behavior*, 52(4), 404-417.

* Van de Cavey, J., & Hartsuiker, R. J. (2016). Is there a domain-general cognitive structuring system? Evidence from structural priming across music, math, action descriptions, and language. *Cognition*, 146, 172-184.

* Makuuchi, M., Bahlmann, J., Anwander, A., & Friederici, A. D. (2009). Segregating the core computational faculty of human language from working memory. *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences*, 106(20), 8362-8367.

<figure><img src="image_12.png" /></figure>