Review, Elman Lecture COGS 1 winter 08 Adrienne Moore

Info about the final exam Tuesday March 18, 8:00am-11:00am; 45% of your final grade Approximately 80 scantron questions –Please bring form X PAR-L Half the questions will cover lecturers since Midterm 2 –Creel, Deak, Urbach, Elman, Poizner, Chiba Half the questions will cover lecturers before Midterm 2 Review Session: Friday 3/14, 4:30-6:50, Center Hall room 214

Do our brains contain a language dedicated module? aka “language organ” Argument for the existence of a language organ: –1. Only humans possess language Other animals communicate, but lack language bees, moths Kanzi the bonobo: learned words and could apply them (to cooking), but what about complex grammar and syntax, non- literal language (lies, metaphor), thoughts about the future & contingency (all aspects of human language) And we have a HUGE vocab, based on CATEGORIES

Argument against the existence of a language organ: –1. You can’t argue by subtraction: “Only humans possess language, so if you subtract the parts of the brain that we share with animals, the rest of the brain must be responsible for language” NO “Only humans possess language, so if you subtract out the 98.2% of our DNA that we share with animals, the rest of our genes must be responsible for language” NO Natural selection produces small modifications of existing organs

Language module? 2 Argument for the existence of a language organ, continued: 2. Broca’s area may be a “language organ” –“Tan” selectively lost his language ability, and when his brain was examined post-mortem, a large hole in the IFG (Broca’s area) was found

Language module? 2 Argument 2 against the existence of a language organ: Tan didn’t lose all his language ability –Retained well-practiced language (counting) Young patients with Broca’s lesions don’t lose language ability – plasticity Tan’s lesion wasn’t actually to “Broca’s area” –It was to the white matter pathway beneath Broca’s area, the superior longitudinal fasciculus

Language module? 3 Argument 3 for: FOXp2 is a “gene for language” –A familial speech disorder was traced to FOXp2 Argument 3 against: –mice have almost identical FOXp2 (and don’t have language) –FOXp2 helps create the basal ganglia (Poizner!) which probably play a role the motor production aspect of speech Individual genes do little jobs that contribute to a larger function – FOXp2 is relevant to language

Conclusion The brain opportunistically creates “new machines from old parts” –For example, mental rotation involves simulation with area MT (visual motion detection area), Non-linguistic abilities are recruited and integrated for language –McGurk effect: visual information about lips affects the speech sounds you hear –Words (conceptual labels) activate relevant sensorimotor brain areas (e.g. action words) There is probably no “language organ”!