“Brain Damage and Brocca Aphasia”

By :

TITIK WINARTI

I. INTRODUCTION

Many people assume physical basis of language lies in lips, tongue, or ears.

People who have no capacity to use their vocal cords may still be able to

comprehend language and use its written forms. Human sign language which is

based on visible gesture rather than the creation of sound waves. Language is

brain stuff-not tongue, lip, ear, or hand stuff. The language organ is the mind.

Language is a function of the peculiar structure of the human brain. Several areas

of the brain have been identified with linguistic skills, such as producing and

understanding speech. Furthermore, people with brain damage in specific areas

have difficulties with very specific aspects of language, implying that it is a highly

compartmentalized process. Furthermore, human brains are functionally

asymmetrical, concentrating many areas essential for speech production in one

hemisphere.

This paper tries to overview certain brain damage which can affect language

production. Furthermore, it will discuss about brocca aphasia that actually does

not eliminate language from the brain.

II. THE CAUSES AND NATURE OF APHASIA

The brain is a sensitive organ because it is enclosed in the skull. A severe

blow at the temples, however, can surpass this natural defense and cause damage

to brain cells. Structural damage can ultimately lead to brain dysfunction as the

connectivity between neurons is disturbed. Brain damage or brain injury is the

destruction or degeneration of brain cells. Brain damage may occur due to a wide

range of conditions, illnesses, or injuries.

Either stroke or brain damage to a specific area of the brain can make a

language disorder. It defines as aphasia. According to Lesser, et al. (1993: 8) all

aphasicpeople have in common (by definition) that they have suffered some form

of brain damage (from stroke, head-injury, tumour, metabolic disorder, toxicity or

other aetology), which has destroyed neuronal cells in parts of the brain on which

language seems to be critically dependent.

Aphasia is caused by damage to one or more of the language areas of the

brain. Lesser, et al. (1993: 8) state that typically the damage which auses aphasia

is unilateral; it affects only, or predominantly, one of the cerebral hemispheres, in

contrast to other neurological conditions which lead to articulatory or intellectual

disorders in which the damage more typically affects both sides of the brain.

Many times, the cause of the brain injury is a stroke. A stroke occurs when

blood is unable to reach a part of the brain. Brain cells die when they do not

receive their normal supply of blood, which carries oxygen and important

nutrients. Other causes of brain injury are severe blows to the head, brain tumors,

brain infections, and other conditions that affect the brain. Two major categories

of aphasia are expressive (motor) and receptive (sensory).

Expressive aphasics can understand language, but can't express it. In other

words, they recognize words, but can't find the means to articulate them. They

usually possess the intellectual capabilities for speech. Much of their

communication consists of pulling, pointing, or gesturing.

Receptive aphasics don't understand speech but have no trouble speaking.

They can ramble on quite fluently, but when one examines the actual content of

their sentences, one can see that they lack meaning. The receptive aphasic may

also ignore sounds, hearing at one moment, but ignoring the next. This can cause

them to be though deaf. There is usually a discrepancy between their intelligence

and actual ability to communicate. (Maxine L. Young, 2000)

http://www.brainconnection.com/topics/?main=fa/memory-language

Fleming (1989) in Lesser, et al. (1993: 9) gives a sample of aphasic speech

from patients who have suffered left cerebral damage.

1. M (2) erh (.) d you (1.0) d you er what school wan you?

2. (points to B)

3. B (1.0) buts

4. M (1.0) buts?

5. B yes

6. M (1.0) buts

7. B yes

8. M yes

9. B er (.) d you oh dear (2) erm (4) erm (2) sums//sums

10. M oh yes yes

Notes : (0.0) pauses or gaps in tenths of seconds

(.) micropause

? not a punctuational mark, but marks a rising

intonation contour

It is clear that verbal communication between these two men is severely

restricted by their aphasic diffiulties. The speech of both patients is characterized

by pauses and limited sentence structure. M uses gesture to assist understanding

of his speech. B seeks clarification (line 4) of M’s replyto his question, but then

appears to accept a repetition without further clarification.

There are two major areas of the human brain that are responsible for

language. One of them is Broca's area, which is thought to be partially responsible

for language production (putting together sentences, using proper syntax, etc.).

When people experience damage to Broca's area or its surroundings, their disorder

is called Broca's aphasia. As predicted by the central role of Broca's area in

language production, Broca's aphasics produce slow, halting speech that is rarely

grammatical. (Maxine L. Young, 2000)

http://www.brainconnection.com/topics/?main=fa/memory-language

Individuals with Broca's aphasia often speak in short, meaningful phrases

that are produced with great effort. For example, a person with Broca's aphasia

may say "walk dog" meaning, "I will take the dog for a walk." The same sentence

could also mean "You take the dog for a walk," or "The dog walked out of the

yard."

III. RECOVERY FROM APHASIA

According to Lesser, et al. (1993: 15-24) there are five ways in which some

recovery of communicatory abilities is thought to be achieved:

1. The neural theories of reactivation

Reactivation of function is consistent with the claim that neuronal

sprouting occurs through stimulation, and with an expectation that the

original behaviour should be restored in its original form. Recovery

through reactivation is perhaps better accounted for by the notion of

redundancy of neurones in a brain system, so that small lessons can be

compensated for by other undamaged neurones within the same system.

2. The neural theories of reorganization

In contrast to reactivation, reorganization implies that language

functions need to be taken over by brain areas which wer previously not

actively involved, perhaps because they were inhibited by the neurones

which have now been put out of action.

3. The psychological theory of cognitive relays

The third approach to therapy is based on the notion of subtitution. This

is based on a less optimistic expectation that the brain is capable of

recovering its original function, either through reactivating the original

ability or achieving it through reorganization. The substitution theory is

that the original ability cannot be restored in its original form, but that

alternative means can be found to achieve a communicative goal, using

intact brain structures which also serve other purposes.

4. The pragmatic use of prostheses

The most obvious use of substitutory techniques externalizes the

prosthesis. Computers have provided a means of communication for

many cerebrally palsied people and adults with acquired dysarthria, but,

like other visual communication systems such as Blissymbols and visual

communication cards, they have also had some limited use as

communicatory media in aphasia, if the ability to handle symbols is not

too impaired.

5. The functional communication strategies

There are other adaptations which aphasic patients make without

external prostheses, which cannot be identified as cognitive relays, but

are apparently pragmatic strategies to achieve communication. The use

of gesture does not come as easily to aphasic adults as might be

presumed from a simple interpretation of their disorder as being one of

language, and many studies have been devoted to examination of

aphasic patients’ disabilities in non-verbal communication.

IV. CONCLUSION

Aphasia is caused by damage to one or more of the language areas of the

brain. Lesser, et al. (1993: 11) state that these aphasic individuals fail to produce

speech, or fail to comprehend, but that they produce speech which does not seem

to reflect their intentions and which the listener has difficulty comprehending.

People with Broca's aphasia are fully aware of their difficulties and often become

frustrated trying to produce sentences. According to Lesser, et al. (1993: 15-24)

there are five ways in which some recovery of communicatory abilities is thought

to be achieved: the neural theories of reactivation and reorganization, the

psychological theory of cognitive relays and the pragmatic use of prostheses and

functional strategies.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Lesser, Ruth, Milroy, Lesley. 1993. Linguistics and aphasia: psycholinguistic and

pragmatic aspects of intervention. London: Longman

Maxine L. Young, 2000 http://www.brainconnection.com/topics/?main=fa/memory-language

University of Oxford, Department of Physiology, Anatomy and Genetics; Kristofer Kinsey PhD http://www.physiol.ox.ac.uk/~kk3/PP%2002%20Sensory%20Memory.ppt

http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cognitive_Psychology_and_Cognitive_Neuroscience