Freethought & Rationalism Archive

RufusAtticus · 06-14-2003, 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Gurdur
Therefore I will be tackling the main aim of all this first, before I can really deal with your objections.

I just want to point out that I really wasn't objecting to your posts, but rather pointing out an assumption you were making that apparantly you have now codified in your response to farren.

Gurdur · 06-14-2003, 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by RufusAtticus
I just want to point out that I really wasn't objecting to your posts, but rather pointing out an assumption you were making that apparantly you have now codified in your response to farren.

No, you were right to tackle me with these objections ---- even if I don't deal with them till later.

I'm constructing my argument to show why (IMHO) a full natural language cannot be inherently better than another one, on general principles, and your objections are well on topic at the start; pardon me if I deal with it in my own way while chugging along the track I've laid for myself first.

Loren Pechtel · 06-14-2003, 06:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Gurdur
Troll, troll, troll, away, HJ.
You're amusing.

---> Mods: two examples of trollish off-topic personal attacks here from HJ, no great deal, just noting for future reference if needed.

You're both going too far. Play nice!

Farren · 06-14-2003, 06:06 PM

Quote:

___________

So there we go.
Still feeling sorry you "shot me down" ?

No, but decidedly chuffed that I ruffled your feathers enough to solicit such a long response.

Heavily involved in code right now. When I'm done figuring out why the F$%^$%$ VB collection objects take so long to unload from memory, I will return with the heavy artillery. I have books here, lots of them.

And I'm a professional Linguini Expert.

By the way Beyelzu apparently has a Python. No, I'm not being rude.

btw I did know about the Wernick-Broca's loop but I wasn't aware that these areas were present on the right hemisphere. I understood that there is some asymmetry here?

...and... I wasn't trying to imply that these areas are nonessential, although I admit the phrasing was misleading. In fact I said they were critical. Try taking the fan off your CPU some time (I've timed it. Roughly 2 seconds after system startup your CPU blows up).

Gurdur · 06-14-2003, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Farren
.......
btw I did know about the Wernick-Broca's loop but I wasn't aware that these areas were present on the right hemisphere. I understood that there is some asymmetry here?

There is some insignificant asymmetry in size and shape, but the basic homologous loci are clear and reasonably well-defined in extent --- and that is the point.

You need either homologous and small area on either hemisphere for language.

You cannot compensate, for example, for missing both areas by using your frontal cortex instead, no matter how massive and plastic the frontal cortex is.
Do you see my point ?

Farren · 06-14-2003, 06:43 PM

Just as a matter of interest

Quote:

The traditional view of the neural basis of human language is that it is cortical. Language is supposed to be regulated by Broca's and Wernicke's neocortical areas, linked by a cortical pathway. However, many independent studies that employ modern imaging techniques such as CT and MRI scans show that these cortical areas can be destroyed without permanent language loss (aphasia). For example, one of the studies that my colleagues and I are completing documents the retention of language in a 60-year-old male after complete destruction of Wernicke's area. Converging evidence shows that permanent aphasia occurs only after massive subcortical damage.

here

CPU fans, anyone?

I'd also be interested to hear what you think of the various forms of agnosia that appear to be concept (and by extension language) linked, such as people who can't distinguish furniture from pets, but can make all other normal distinctions. Stats across different language speakers?

[Edited to add]

Quote:

Broca's area. A premotor module of the neocortex (in the lower lateral frontal lobe; specifically, Brodmann's areas 44 and 45) identified in 1861 by Paul Broca as essentially involved in the production and control of human speech. Damage to this area (called Broca's aphasia) produces problems in speaking (while comprehension of another's speech is left unimpaired). According to Philip Lieberman, Broca's area ". . . has no functional equivalent in nonhumans" (Lieberman 1991:24; but see below, Evolution I and II). Recently, a language module immediately anterior to Broca's area has been identified, which suggests that the Broca module may be involved in sequencing complex articulations which are not just limited to speech. Broca's area does not seem to control syntax* (i.e., the combinatorial or grammatical arrangement of speech elements; see below, Neuro-notes II).

here

The syntax issue, I think, is pretty important when discussing the relative value of languages

Feel free not to reply. I know I'm sidetracking. Can't help it.. moth to a flame...

Gurdur · 06-14-2003, 06:53 PM

Quote:

The traditional view of the neural basis of human language is that it is cortical. Language is supposed to be regulated by Broca's and Wernicke's neocortical areas, linked by a cortical pathway. However, many independent studies that employ modern imaging techniques such as CT and MRI scans show that these cortical areas can be destroyed without permanent language loss (aphasia).

So apparently another plastic cortical path takes over the missing pathway ?
How does this invalidate Broca's and Wernicke's neocortical areas ?

Quote:

For example, one of the studies that my colleagues and I are completing documents the retention of language in a 60-year-old male after complete destruction of Wernicke's area.

Doesn't say whether both hemispherical homologous areas were destroyed. Only apparently one Wernicke's area; not other hemisphere. Additionally, retention of what language abilities ?
Production probably OK; Wernicke's aphasia not gone into in any detail ?

Quote:

Converging evidence shows that permanent aphasia occurs only after massive subcortical damage.Converging evidence shows that permanent aphasia occurs only after massive subcortical damage.

Now looking up the ref's. Will comment when researched.

Quote:

Moreover, .....speech and language deficits similar to those traditionally associated with Broca's aphasia. Parkinson's Disease affects the operation of subcortical basal ganglia, largely sparing neocortex. .... A highly significant correlation between syntax comprehension deficits and speech production sequencing deficits exists in PD subjects. The correlation may derive, in part, from impairment of short-term memory (verbal working memory); independent studies show that comprehending the meaning of a sentence involves maintaining its words in verbal working-memory by a process of "silent-speech" using the neural structures that regulate overt speech. Therefore, impaired neural regulation of speech production would also affect sentence comprehension.

Emphasis added. See the problem ?

Quote:

As the climbers ascended to higher altitudes where less oxygen was present, we administered language comprehension and cognitive tests. The climbers' speech motor control deficits were correlated with increases in the time that was necessary to comprehend simple sentences. Deficits in judgment also occurred in the climber-subjects -- the high death rate on Everest reflects cognitive losses as well as the weather and technical difficulties. These behavioral deficits most likely derive from impairment of globus pallidus, a basal ganglia structure that can be damaged by low oxygen levels.

Again:
short-term memory problems here, not problems inherent with language istelf ?

I.e., problems with incoming signal reception and initial handling, not problems with basic signal-processing algorithms ?
hmmmm ?

Gurdur · 06-14-2003, 07:01 PM

Quote:

The traditional view of the neural basis of human language is that it is cortical. Language is supposed to be regulated by Broca's and Wernicke's neocortical areas, linked by a cortical pathway. However, many independent studies that employ modern imaging techniques such as CT and MRI scans show that these cortical areas can be destroyed without permanent language loss (aphasia).

Tackling this one again, since my last reply was affected by doing two other things at the same time.

"The traditional view of the neural basis of human language is that it is cortical." ???

Would have differed with that myself; if Broca's and Wernicke's are neocortical, then much of the language module is neocortical.

The loops through to the cortex and cerebellum could, < speculation >, be far more plastic in basic task-assignment than the Broca's and Wernicke's neocortical areas.

Since, Farren, you started off by denying the essentiality of Broca's and Wernicke's, that part certainly doesn't seem to support your argument.

You are left with the 60-year-old mentioned above, and with the problems I noted with that one.

Farren · 06-14-2003, 07:04 PM

Read two posts back. Did not deny essentiality.

Anyway, I'm have to get back to this thread later. Losing the thread of programming and I reaaaallly need to get this done. My short term memory is shot.

Gurdur · 06-14-2003, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Broca's area. ,,,,,, Damage to this area (called Broca's aphasia) produces problems in speaking (while comprehension of another's speech is left unimpaired).

Not just problems with speaking, but also writing or Sgn Language.
BTW, heard of Broca's Amusica with the homologous rightside area ?

Quote:

According to Philip Lieberman, Broca's area ". . . has no functional equivalent in nonhumans" (Lieberman 1991:24; but see below, Evolution I and II). Recently, a language module immediately anterior to Broca's area has been identified, which suggests that the Broca module may be involved in sequencing complex articulations which are not just limited to speech. Broca's area does not seem to control syntax (i.e., the combinatorial or grammatical arrangement of speech elements; see below, Neuro-notes II).

I.e., a stroke affecting Broca's area may affect the immediate anterior area as well.
Again, you've got specific dedciated brain areas of small size, not the massive plasticity regarding language you have suggested.

Quote:

Insula. Some regard the insula as a verbal center .....

Planum temporale. "The planum temporale (PT) is a key site within Wernicke's posterior receptive language area in the left hemisphere of the human brain ......

Wernicke's area. ........

Again, you've got specific dedciated brain areas of small size, not the massive plasticity regarding language you have suggested.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-14-2003, 07:04 PM	#49
Farren Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: South Africa Posts: 2,194	Read two posts back. Did not deny essentiality. Anyway, I'm have to get back to this thread later. Losing the thread of programming and I reaaaallly need to get this done. My short term memory is shot.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.