I asked a neuroscientist about this who in turn asked a friend who studies language disorders of the brain at Cambridge. Here is what he had to say:
“This fellow sounds like he must be an undergrad, or a non-psychologist. No-one believes that the area traditionally defined as Broca’s area is the only frontal area involved in language processing or even in Broca’s aphasia, and even less for Wernicke’s. Those anatomical labels are only used as heuristics; it’s much more accurate (and common) when writing on the subject to use anatomical names like ‘left inferior frontal gyrus pars triangularis / pars orbitalis / pars opercularis’. I think the general understanding is that you rarely get straightforward, unambiguous cases of patients who definitely only show sypmtoms of one specific type of aphasia anyway. More to the point, it’s not the case that all researchers have the same point of view on these things, and it’s certainly not unusual to see papers that claim to have a new, different explanation for something. They’re ten-a-penny. From a systems neuroscience perspective it’s much more meaningful to think about things in terms of disconnection syndromes and hodological principles—i.e. the effects of certain types and locations of damage on the properties of the system/network as whole, rather than be strictly localizationist about the causes of aphasias.”
This fellow sounds like he must be an undergrad, or a non-psychologist.
Thank you for that cogent ad-homimen argument!
No-one believes that the area traditionally defined as Broca’s area is the only frontal area involved in language processing or even in Broca’s aphasia, and even less for Wernicke’s.
Which is why I never said that anyone believed that. It is common for damage to a number of different, often nearby, structures, to cause similar symptoms. It’s common for it to be difficult to distinguish symptoms caused by different underlying damage.
In the case of Broca’s area and Wernicke’s area, however, it’s more than that. There is strong evidence that damage to Broca’s area does not cause Broca’s aphasia (while damage to numerous other areas does); and damage to Wernicke’s area does not cause Wernicke’s aphasia (though damage to numerous other nearby areas does).
I asked a neuroscientist about this who in turn asked a friend who studies language disorders of the brain at Cambridge. Here is what he had to say:
“This fellow sounds like he must be an undergrad, or a non-psychologist. No-one believes that the area traditionally defined as Broca’s area is the only frontal area involved in language processing or even in Broca’s aphasia, and even less for Wernicke’s. Those anatomical labels are only used as heuristics; it’s much more accurate (and common) when writing on the subject to use anatomical names like ‘left inferior frontal gyrus pars triangularis / pars orbitalis / pars opercularis’. I think the general understanding is that you rarely get straightforward, unambiguous cases of patients who definitely only show sypmtoms of one specific type of aphasia anyway. More to the point, it’s not the case that all researchers have the same point of view on these things, and it’s certainly not unusual to see papers that claim to have a new, different explanation for something. They’re ten-a-penny. From a systems neuroscience perspective it’s much more meaningful to think about things in terms of disconnection syndromes and hodological principles—i.e. the effects of certain types and locations of damage on the properties of the system/network as whole, rather than be strictly localizationist about the causes of aphasias.”
Thank you for that cogent ad-homimen argument!
Which is why I never said that anyone believed that. It is common for damage to a number of different, often nearby, structures, to cause similar symptoms. It’s common for it to be difficult to distinguish symptoms caused by different underlying damage.
In the case of Broca’s area and Wernicke’s area, however, it’s more than that. There is strong evidence that damage to Broca’s area does not cause Broca’s aphasia (while damage to numerous other areas does); and damage to Wernicke’s area does not cause Wernicke’s aphasia (though damage to numerous other nearby areas does).