Reflect on the readings. Do you have any questions about the texts? Are there any claims that you find problematic? Do you think language is a purely biological phenomenon? What parts of the brain are most important for the production and comprehension of speech? How do you conceptualize or process meaning? Do these readings inspire any special insights or motivations that could help advance your foreign-language abilities, retention, and recollection?
You need to be a member of The SDLAP Ning to add comments!
Replies
I don’t have many questions about the text, having covered a lot of the brain areas in my behavioral neuroscience class previously, but I find the conversation surrounding Wernicke’s and Broca’s areas particularly interesting. Cortical localization is important and true to an extent, as evinced by the talking/comprehension experiments, but that singular explanation is too simple for a human brain, just as the ‘division’ between left and right hemispheres is too simple an explanation for brain function, even though certain areas do specialize in different things.
Language is not strictly a biological phenomenon; it’s also a social one. Humans are unique in this way, particularly in the structure of our cerebral cortex, which is densely packed with neural connections, particularly in our frontal lobe, where most of our decision making is localized. We’re able to problem solve unlike any other species, which led to our competitive evolution. In forming our brains this way, there were also trade-offs; we chose adaptability and sociability over most anything else. Instead of being self-sufficient infants, like many other mammals who are up walking and making sounds within hours of birth, human babies are defenseless and entirely reliant on others to care for them. This need for care both builds the social bond towards others and makes us reliant on those established systems but allows us to survive in the most extreme conditions and apply logic to situations around us. Without exposure to other people to build that network of connection, for language, systems of thought, uses for items, etc., a human child would grow up deficient and unable to form bonds with those around them, which evolutionarily we are designed to need.
In the “How We Mean” chapter, I found it fascinating the ways it described differences in language to ascertain meaning: changing the spelling, grammatical structure, the intonation, or shift the expected response to one that’s equally valid but understood as a different tone. While I’m far off from that point in understanding, I think these changes are what defines the boundary between understanding and fluency. If you understand the definitional meaning of the words said to you, that’s great – but if you understand the underlying meaning behind those words, that’s where true comprehension sets in.
When talking about cerebral dominance the author failed to mention anything about ambidextrous people. Does being ambidextrous affect the brain at all? I've also always believed that being left or right-handed was just due to which hand their parents got them to use. For example, I believe in Korean culture it is either bad luck or seen as impure to use your left hand. I also think it is possible to switch especially when you are forced to due to injury.
I don’t believe language is a purely biological phenomenon because that would disregard a lot of the culture that goes into language. How does one biologically explain dialects or accents?
Broca’s area primarily affects the ability to speak. Wernicke’s area plays a major part in the ability to comprehend speech
For me, I tend to always conceptualize meaning as “referring to” something that I already know/have experienced. This way I can narrow down the number of meanings a certain word can have.
Something that was highlighted to me was that “different languages talk about the world in different ways.” I think a huge hindrance to my foreign-language abilities is that I have that mindset that English is the most natural. All I think about is the literal translation from English to another language that I forget how each language has its own terminology.
I agree with your point how language isn't purely biological. It's really interesting to me how some people speak 16 languages all from learning. Most people believe that language learning occurs during the childhood years and after that, the capability for language learning declines rapidly. While that is true, the capacity for language actually extends throughout life, meaning that people can learn any language at any age. This makes me wonder if they train their brain in different ways or higher plasticity?
I thought the readings provided very interesting commentary on language and how it can be utilized. However, I was curious about some of the concepts discussed. The idea of a person who is right or left handed utilizing one side of their brain more was interesting to me. Does this mean that a person who is ambidextrous would have an advantage in learning language and thinking in general over someone who is only say right handed? Based on the assertions by the author maybe it is true that the very small percentage of the population that is born truly ambidextrous is generally more intelligent than someone who has one dominant hand. I also thought localization was an interesting part of the article and might explain why people who experience brain damage in specific parts of their brains can still function. I do not think language is purely biological. I think with different languages come different cultures and ways of viewing the world. Based on the readings, the Broca’s area and Wernicke area are most important for production and conceptualization of speech. The Broca’s area is responsible for the physical ability to speak. It seems the Wernicke area is the part of the brain that helps conceptualize and process what is said. These two parts of the brain seem like they need to function well for a person to conversate. If the Broca’s area is functioning but the Wernicke area is not functioning then a person would be able to speak their thoughts but could not understand others when they expressed themselves and vice versa. Overall, I thought the reading was very helpful and educational. I learned that learning a new language can help me fully utilize all parts of my brain. Now I know that depending on whether I am speaking, writing, or reading Hebrew, I will be utilizing different parts of my brain.
That's an interesting point you bring about people that are ambidextrous. Are we even able to truly determine who is ambidextrous? Some become ambidextrous when their dominant hands get injured. Gathering enough people (data) to do this would also probably be extremely difficult. I've personally never met anyone that was truly ambidextrous.
Overall, I have a hard time wrapping my head around how language works. Somehow, a bunch of random sounds come together and create meaning.
There were no parts I thought were that problematic. However, it would be interesting to see how other cultures and languages perceive the way we learn language.
I do not think that it is purely biological. Perhaps the process of learning the language may be biological in terms of how the brain changes. However, there are other aspects such as emotion and cultural phenomenons, which are often attached to language but not often emphasized. Today's learning language may require not just be a biological phenomenon because of how language represents thoughts and sophisticated notions. The complex qualities of modern language at all linguistic levels are mutually connected from emotion and culture. When learning a new language, it comes from an increase in brain capacity. As a result, it is reasonable to suppose that spoken language processing skills evolved alongside sensory and episodic experiences in order to transmit them.
Wernicke's region, located in the posterior superior temporal lobe, is connected to Broca's area through a neuronal route. Wernicke's region is principally responsible for understanding. This region has traditionally been linked to language processing, whether written or spoken. Broca's region is connected with speech production and articulation and is found in the left hemisphere. This essential region has been linked to our capacity to explain thoughts and utilize words correctly in spoken and written language.
The detection of the speech signal happens and it is translated into an abstract representation, also known as decoding, are the first steps in speech understanding. Phonemes, the smallest unit of meaning, are interpreted as speech sounds. Phoneme perception is impacted by word and phrase context. The continuous voice signal must be segmented in order to analyze its meaning.
These readings gave me a better understanding on how the brain works when it comes to language learning. In the chapter "How We Mean", Crystal talks about how we understand and decipher meaning in language. For example, understanding the importances of semantic fields and collocations, which I can put to use when learning Korean.
I also sometimes struggle to understand how language works and was created. I think it helps to look at wild animals and how they communicate using auditory methods as well. Humans probably developed oral communication because of a concept that has made humans do a lot of things throughout human history: natural selection. Those who could communicate had a better shot at surviving.
The text breaks down language into ways that put my brain through intense mental gymnastics. I feel like I’ve just become hyper aware of the taste of my tongue, how many times I blink, every little movement of my eyes and hands and so on. Needless to say I have several questions about the text; one specifically being, how are auditory reception and comprehension of speech differentiated both experimentally and practically?
There were no parts of the text I thought particularly problematic but I do wonder how similar concepts would be analyzed and written by a non native English speakers or other linguists largely separated from euro-centric languages and culture.
I do believe language is a purely biological phenomenon, in the same way that I believe all things human are purely biological. Emotions are chemically driven, so are thoughts., and will power and all other whimsically human concepts. The sense of such a delineation like biological phenomenon is often considered sterile and unromantic, but I feel quite the opposite. The fact that we are biologically wired to create things like language is, to me, an absolutely stunning fact of life.
The text lists many sources of language production and comprehension in the brain including the fissure of Rolando, linked to speech auditory, and writing mechanics. Wernicke’s area has been found largely to be responsible for comprehension of speech. Helchl’s gyri is thought to be a center of auditory reception. Broca’s area is credited with encoding speech and Exner’s centre is thought to be involved in the motor functions of writing.
I have realized through this reading that meaning, for me, is extremely intuitive and a bit personal. I have an inner voice like most, and it is at least 60% of the time full sentences but often my process of conceptualizing is itself very conceptual. Conceptualization for me is a disembodied cloud full of emotional responses. I think of the word flower and the meaning makes itself clear by triggering an emotion I would feel when looking at or smelling something beautiful, or holding something delicate, or the feeling of a light breeze. There is very little concrete about the process.
To apply these findings to language learning, I plan to make good friends with this abstract process of understanding. I will turn vocabulary lists into personal narratives and engage more with emotion driven media in my target languages and I am glad to know that my brain is well equipped to do so.