Post on 20-Aug-2015
The Neuroscience of Language
From Structure to Process
Neuroscience and Language
• Aphasia (or dysphasia) – Language disorder of auditory or oral speech, writing (agraphia), or reading (alexia) produced by injury to brain areas specialized for these functions
Nature’s Experiments
Nature’s Experiments
• Stroke – Status post 5 hours
Nature’s Experiments
• Status post 5 days.
Blood-Brain Barrier
• Blood is toxic to neurons.– Makes evolutionary
sense.– Insulates brain from
what’s in the blood.
Paul Broca
• Broca (1865) described patients who displayed halting, agrammatic speech– Content words were
well preserved– Function words (i.e.,
adjectives, articles) impaired
Paul Broca1824-1880
Broca’s Aphasia
• Patient “Tan”• Brain tumor in Left frontal brain region• Broca: Lesion disrupted speech
Broca’s Aphasia
• Broca’s Aphasia – Damage to “motor images”• Language comprehension skills relatively
preserved• Typically observed in patients with damage to
left inferior prefrontal cortex
Broca’s Aphasia
• “Yes… ah… Monday… er… Dad and Peter H… (patient’s name), and Dad… er… hospital… and ah… Wednesday… Wednesday, nine o’clock… and oh… Thursday… ten o’clock, ah doctors… two… an’ doctors… and er… teeth…yah
Goodglass & Geschwind, 1976
Carl Wernicke
• Wernicke (1874) described patients whose speech is fluent, but has no informational value
Wernicke’s Aphasia• Neologisms• Speech appears to have no
information content • “fluent nonsense”• Preserved function words,
impaired content words• Comprehension impaired• Even simple sentences not well
understood• Associated with left temporal
lobe damage
Wernicke’s Aphasia
• “Well this is… mother is away here working her work out o’here to get her better, but when she’s looking in the other part. One their small tile into her time here. She’s working another time…”
Goodglass & Geschwind, 1976
Auditory speech “memories”
Articulatory speech “memories”
Geschwind 1979Scientific American
Comprehension problems
Production problems
+empty error-filled
production
Auditory speech “memories”
Articulatory speech “memories”
Wernicke’s aphasiaBroca’s aphasia
Comprehension problems
Production problems
+empty error-filled
production
Lichtheim
• Lichtheim (1885) – cases of patients able to understand and produce speech but unable to repeat words
• “Conduction aphasia”
• Hypothesis: Broca’s area (speech production) and Wernicke’s area (speech comprehension) intact
Comprehension problems
Production problems
+empty error-filled
production
Conduction aphasia
Wernicke’s aphasiaBroca’s aphasia
Error-filled speech, but good comprehension
Broca’s, Wernicke’s Area, and Connections
• Lichtheim’s (1885) and Geschwind’s (1965) model
• Auditory input mediated by Wernicke’s area• Motor output mediated byBroca’s area• Regions connected by arcuate fasciculus
C
AM
Wernicke-Lichtheim “House” Model
Auditory word imagesWernicke’s area
Motor word imagesBroca’s area
Concept representationsWidely distributed!
Lichtheim/Geschwind Model
Concepts
Motor wordComprehension
Auditory wordComprehension
Speech motor outputAuditory input
Association Cortex
Ventral prefrontalcortex
Posterior Temporal Cortex
ArcuateFasciculus
Lichtheim/Geschwind Model
Broca’s Aphasia
Concepts
Motor wordComprehension
Auditory wordComprehension
Speech motor outputAuditory input
Association Cortex
Ventral prefrontalcortex X Arcuate
Fasciculus
Posterior Temporal Cortex
Lichtheim/Geschwind Model
Wernicke’s Aphasia
Concepts
Motor wordComprehension
Auditory wordComprehension
Speech motor outputAuditory input
Association Cortex
Ventral prefrontalcortex XArcuate
Fasciculus
Posterior Temporal Cortex
Lichtheim/Geschwind Model
Conduction Aphasia
Concepts
Motor wordComprehension
Auditory wordComprehension
Speech motor outputAuditory input
Association Cortex
Ventral prefrontalcortex XArcuate
Fasciculus
Posterior Temporal Cortex
More aphasias!
C
AM
Aphasia type Production Comp Repetition
1. Broca’s Non-fluent Good Poor
2. Wernicke’s Fluent, paraphasic
Poor Poor
3. Conduction Fluent, paraphasic
Good Poor
4.Transcortical sensory
Fluent, paraphasic
Poor Good
5.Transcortical motor
Terse, echolalic
Good Good
6. Global Poor Poor Poor
7. Aphemia Dysarthric Good Limited only by dysarthria
8. Pure word deafness
Normal Very poor! As if deaf!
Very poor
1 2
3
45
7 8
Problems
• Models assumed to map directly onto underlying brain structures
• However, patients described as “Broca’s aphasics” had lesions in other areas
• Inadequate psychological concepts – e.g., “loss of motor images”
Broca’s Aphasia
• Damage to Broca’s area alone is not enough to produce Broca’s aphasia
• Usually involves Broca’s area + surrounding areas including M1 & insula.
Wernicke’s Aphasia
• Damage to Wernicke’s area alone is not enough to produce Wernicke’s aphasia
• Usually involves Wernicke’s area + surrounding areas including MTG & angular gyrus.
Conduction Aphasia
• Damage to the arcuate fasciculus has not been associated with conduction aphasia
• Usually two lesion patterns: posterior STG (wernicke’s areas) and/or SMG
Common area?
Transcortical Sensory Aphasia
• Variable lesion patterns, mostly posterior to Wernicke’s area
• Deficit tends to be transient evolving into anomic aphasia
Common area?
Transcortical Motor Aphasia
• Damage often anterior and/or superior to Broca’s area
Global Aphasia
• Tend to be large “peri-Sylvian” lesions• But smaller lesions can also cause global aphasia
Aphemia
• Damage to lower motor cortex
Pure Word Deafness
• Damage to STG bilaterally is the most common pattern, although small left subcortical lesions have also been documented.
Neuropsychology Methods
• Early neuropsychology (Broca, Wernicke, Luria, et al.) made inferences based largely on associations– Identify a group of patients with fairly
homogeneous functional impairment– fairly homogeneous physical impairment– Identify a “syndrome”
Problems
• Absence of rigid quantitative methodology of the day
• Patients not always carefully described
Resurgence of Neuropsychology
in the 1960s• Renewed interest in using
neuropsychological cases to draw inferences about neural substrata of cognition
• More powerful inferential methods
• Emphasis on– Single case studies– Modern quantitative methods
Neuropsychology Methods
• Modern neuropsychology (e.g., Warrington, McCarthy, Farah)
• Study single cases or groups with homogeneous physical impariment
• Focus on dissociations
Neuropsychology Methods
• Single dissociation
• Patient with lesion in brain region A
• Performs well on task A
• Performs poorly on task B
• Inference: brain region A mediates performance on task B but not task A
Neuropsychology Methods
• Problems with single dissociations• Does not rule out other interpretations• Patient may suffer some global deficit (e.g.,
general cognitive resource) that Task A does not require (e.g., because it is easier)
• Thus, performance differences between Tasks A and B may reflect task difficulty, not the function of Brain Region A
Neuropsychology Methods• Double dissociation• Patient with lesion in brain region A performs
well on Task A and poorly on Task B• Patient with lesion in brain region B performs
well on Task B but poorly on Task A• Inference: Brain region A mediates Task B
Brain Region B mediates Task A
Neuropsychology Methods
• Since subjects are “equated” for damage, “global deficit” argument circumvented
• Tasks may be assumed to be modular, depending on separate neural processes or resources
Brain Imaging
• We now have techniques that allow us to visualize the structure and function of the brain.
MRI
• MRI of a typical brain.
PET
• Typical brain visualized with Positron Emission Tomography.
Functional Neuroimaging
• Functional magnetic resonance imaging
DeoxyOxy
-time (seconds)
Functional Neuroimaging
• Petersen et al., 1988 PET study
Passive word viewing-Activates visual areas-Particularly Left Occipital Cortex
Passive word listening-Activates auditory areas-Words (not nonwords) particularly Left Temporal Cortex (Wernicke’s area)
Functional Neuroimaging
• Confirms neuropsychology research
Repeating words-Bilateral activation of motor andSensory face areas-No Activation of Broca’s orWernicke’s
Verb Generation-e.g., Cake “Eat”- Left Frontal Lobe Activation (Broca’s Area)
What Have we Learned?
• What does localization tell us?– Where processing is occuring.– What is connected to what.– How many parts there are.– What happens when one part gets
damaged.
• We’d like to know more.
What Would we Like to Know?
• How the parts work.– What are the rules and representations
that are involved with language processing?
– What is the nature of the processing that is taking place.
• Digital/discrete/autonomous• Analog/continuous/integrated
ERP studies
• Semantics– N400
• Syntax– LAN– P600/SPS
N400 (2)
P600
Haagort et al. (2003)
Het vrouwtje veegde de vloer met een oude bezem gemaakt van twijgen (The woman wiped the floor with an old broom made of twigs).*Het vrouwtje veegde de vloer met een oude kliederde gemaakt van twijgen (The woman wiped the floor with an old messed made of twigs).
P600 can serve as an index of frequency of a construction
• The captain liked the crew was unhappy• The captain heard the crew was unhappy• The captain believed the crew was unhappy • A P600 was strongest in the first sentence, present in
the second sentence, and not present in the third sentence.
• Larger P600 for syntactically complex sentences (Kaan et al., 2002).
Correct: De houthakker ontweek de schroef op dinsdag (The lumberjack dodged the propellor on Tuesday).Weak violation: *De houthakker ontweek de schroeft op dinsdag (The lumberjack dodged the propelled on Tuesday).Strong violation: *De houthakker ontweek de omdat op dinsdag (The lumberjack dodged the because on Tuesday).
Combining methods
Summary
• The Wernicke-Geschwind model is being replaced by new models.
• New models focus on both neural basis and timing of language comprehension, and have moved beyond simplistic divisions of comprehension/production.