Body part as object

Last updated

Body part as object (BPO) mime gestures occurs when an individual substitutes a part of their body - usually arms, fingers, or hands - to be part of an object they are miming. [1] Miming uses representational gestures, meaning they are used to convey a message to others without the use of speech. [1] [2] [3] A commonly used example of BPO miming is demonstrated by an individual using their finger to represent a toothbrush while acting out brushing their teeth. [4]

Contents

In studying gestures from a psychological, psycholinguistic, and/or neuropsychological context, pantomimes can be distinguished by how they are carried out. For example, BPO mime gestures are differentiated by the insertion of a body part to help represent the object itself. [1] Conversely, Imaginary object (IO) pantomimes occur when an individual mimes the use of an object as though the object were actually present. Using a similar example to above, an IO pantomime occurs as an individual pretends to brush their teeth by positioning the hand and fingers as though the toothbrush were actually in their hand: they are pretending the object is actually present. [4]

BPO, and BPO measures particularly, are notable in that they have proven useful in studying cognition (e.g. language development, developmental psychology), and in identifying - and to a limited degree, in treating - cognitive impairment (e.g. aphasia, apraxia, schizophrenia etc.).

BPO concept

Pantomimes: BPO and IO

BPO pantomimes are generally seen more in young children (3–5 years old) and those with brain damage. [5] There are many theories as to why BPO may be prevalent in these populations. This includes disruptions in the conceptual or temporal-spatial stages in the process of learned gestures, [6] an impairment of conveying hand-posture of tool use, [7] and a poor representation of an external objects. [4] [5] [8] IO pantomimes are seen as much more complex than BPO pantomimes because they must have a strong mental representation of the object to be used and understood. An individual cannot garner any supportive information from the environment, and must know and understand the properties of the object to manipulate it as though it is in use, even though it is not physically present. [9]

Examples of models explaining gestures

There have been many models attempting to explain how gestures are related to semantic concepts, such as imagery and speech. The Sketch Model relates semantic concepts and gestures to one another. It posits that gestures and speech have the common purpose of communication, and thus are represented at the same conceptual level. The function of gestures are then to enhance access to mental imagery. [10] Motor movement, while gesturing, has also been related to phonological encoding; [11] therefore, gestural movements may prompt access to word forms and help the speaker convey their intent to others. Significantly, this model can only be generalized when gestures and their consequent speech have a meaningful relationship with each other. Overall, this theory suggests that difficult speech, such as describing motor and spatial information, will increase the amount of representational gestures produced by a speaker. Studies have supported this model through unplanned speech producing more gestures, the description of difficult figures producing more gestures than simpler figures, and a greater amount of gestures produced when participants have the freedom to say whatever they would like instead of following a script. [2]

Additionally, there are many studies that have shown increased gesture production is dependent on the availability and strength of an imagery representation. [2] Most recently, the Gesture as Simulated Action (GSA) theory has become prominent; it focuses on the role of mental imagery in increasing an individual's rate of gestures. GSA posits that imagining an object or event stimulates the same brain areas - the motor and visual cortices - involved in using or viewing objects and events, and thus facilitates the production of a representational gesture. [12] Therefore, when objects are thought of using mental or visual imagery, more gestures should be produced. On the other hand, if an object is thought of only through its verbal representation, there should be fewer gestures present. [2]

Tool-use and gestures

Tool-use is the manipulation, or use, of an object using the hands. [13] It is one of the many skills that separate humans from animals. There are two factors used to explain tool-use in humans. First of all, part of tool-use knowledge is physical, meaning that it involves the actual manipulation of an object. The other type of knowledge is conceptual: using the physical (or active) knowledge of tool-use to add to the mental representation of the tool. Action schemas explain how we develop motor skills and performance of many complex motor-activities. Essentially, the more an object is manipulated and used, a greater schema is developed in the brain. Therefore, increased object use gives us a greater understanding of the object, which then facilitates our understanding of the object independent of its context. The strength of an action schema is significant in studying apraxia and BPO pantomimes, because there appears to be a disruption in the context of an object: an individual may understand the function of an object, but experiences difficulty using the object out of its context, or when it is not physically present. [13]

There have been many studies relating activated brain areas to tool-use, in both physical object manipulation and pantomimes. Meta-analyses have found that tool-use is largely lateralized in the left-hemisphere of the brain and independent of handedness. [13] Specifically, the brain region which showed the greatest activity was the left superior parietal lobule. Other areas that showed significant activity was bilaterally in both the ventral and dorsolateral premotor cortex, areas by the inferior parietal lobule, and tissue around the medial temporal gyrus. Furthermore, even when object-use was imagined, activation was found to be largely lateralized in the left hemisphere and was very similar to the brain activation in actual tool-use and pantomiming. The only significant difference was additional activation in the left occipito-parietal region.

Viewing tools potentiates motor activity related to the specific tool-use. This phenomenon is different from other classes of objects, and indicates that tools are not viewed just based on what they are, but also what they actually do. In just viewing tools, activation of left lateralized areas are very similar to the use/pantomiming areas as noted above. These areas include the ventral premotor cortex, left inferior frontal gyrus and some parietal areas. The main difference is that tools being used elicit greater activation in ventral brain regions, and decreased activation in primary motor areas. Additionally, there were very similar areas of activation in naming tools and viewing tools. There were other areas of activation in the left hemisphere, possibly reflecting the lateralization of language. [13]

Differential brain activation has been compared between the us of either IO or BPO pantomimes. [14] The IO pantomime activity was largely lateralized in the left hemisphere, namely in the bilateral supplementary motor areas, cingulate gyrus, left premotor areas, left superior parietal lobule, and the left middle and inferior frontal gyri. The BPO pantomimes activated areas bilaterally in the supplementary motor areas, cingulate gyrus, premotor areas, SMG and the left inferior and middle frontal gyri, and the left medial temporal gyri. The main difference observed was that IO pantomime activation was left-hemisphere lateralized and BPO pantomime activation was bilateral. These results imply that BPO pantomimes actually show greater activation than IO pantomimes (despite the prevailing conception that they are simpler), and that BPO involves the right hemisphere as well as the left hemisphere. These results could be extended as an explanation of why apraxic brain damage - usually found in left-hemisphere - leads to BPO production. [14] This may be an indication that apraxic's utilize their right-hemisphere in lieu of their left-hemisphere damage, and therefore produce more BPO pantomimes. [14]

BPO history

Concepts leading to the exploration and discovery of body part as object pantomimes first began in the late 19th century. Problems in the ability to comprehend or communicate with symbols, asymbolia, was first established by Finkelnburg. [15] This idea of representational disturbance instead of disturbance in movement is still present in the current discussion of aphasia and BPO pantomimes. In 1905, Liepmann conducted a study of brain injured patients. [16] He wrote of ideokinetic apraxia, the dissociation between the idea of movement of a real or imagined object and its implementation. Problems with gestures and pantomimes were considered to be a category of apraxia. He concluded that the control of effortful movements was in the left hemisphere and that aphasia could indicate lesions in the brain. Various other theories regarding gestural deficits of aphasics have been put forward since then, including intellectual degradation, [17] [18] and the inability to carry out pretended actions. [19] Denny-Brown [20] takes a more holistic approach and suggested ideational apraxia results from diffuse brain damage.

Body part as object is a relatively new concept in scientific literature. Past studies have suggested that BPO pantomimes may allow aphasics to avoid an impaired cognitive function. [1] By not having to reproduce a movement outside of the usual context, they can have a more vivid experience of acting on an object. What is known as BPO pantomiming in children was first discussed in Harold Goodglass and George Kaplan's 1963 article, [1] and the results replicated by Overton & Jackson. [4] Their findings suggest younger children were more likely to use BPO pantomimes to create a tangible representation of the object they were pantomiming. Boyatzis & Watson [21] suggests that the decrease in BPO pantomime usage with age is a result of developing symbolic maturity, as older children can use a less concrete representational form.

Controversy in using BPO as measure

Body part as object errors are defined as the use of BPO pantomimes in place of the IO pantomimes dominant in typical adult individuals. It has been debated whether the existence of BPO errors can be used as a measure for aphasia or brain damage. In the studies conducted by Mercaitis [22] and Ohnemus, [23] normal adult subjects occasionally used BPO pantomimes, suggesting these errors are not restricted to children and those with brain damage. In addition, more BPO errors are made by older adults around 70 years of age and adults with lower education. [24] The gesture itself also plays a role of the labelling performance, affected by the complexity and conventionality of the movement and the familiarity of the item. [4] There exists a great deal of variability among similar aged children's aptitude in using IO pantomimes, some excelling while a proportion continue to use BPO pantomimes frequently. [25] No age range seems to exist in which children apply and understand BPO pantomimes exclusively. [5] These extraneous variables should therefore be considered when using BPO errors as a measure. Some studies do not account for these factors, which may explain conflicting results between them. A concern in testing for apraxia and BPO errors is the use of qualitative judgments in place of quantifiable data. [26] Many assessments of apraxia have been published, however few are considered to be clinically appropriate. Numerous evaluations focus on a single deficit, take long periods of time, and do not include psychometric characteristics. Future studies will be needed to further investigate the relationship between BPO errors, brain damage or aphasia, and the measurement and/or diagnostic potential.

BPO implications and applications

Studies of gestural ability incorporating BPO measures consider aspects of cognition, language, language impairment, and motor apraxia. Cognitive and linguistic studies tend to emphasize symbolic representation, expression, and comprehension in a human development context. Language impairment studies utilize BPO measures to explore gestural deficits that are correlated with particular language capabilities, and to help distinguish distinctive categories of - and degrees of severity in - aphasia. [27] Studies of motor apraxia use BPO measures to better understand gestural impairment in apraxic patients, and often consider aphasia as an apraxic phenomenon.

Developmental psychology

It has been well-established that when pantomiming objects, preschool aged children use BPO pantomimes instead of IO pantomimes. [4] [5] [9] [21] Conceptually, this is similar to children using replica objects (i.e. concretely similar objects) in pretend play before they progress to using substitute objects (i.e. abstractly representative objects). [28]

There are a number of developmental theoretical accounts for this BPO pantomime proclivity in young children.

It is thought that this BPO pantomime preference is indicative of an undeveloped metarepresentational cognitive capacity, which emerges in the second year of life and leads to dominant use of IO pantomimes over BPO pantomimes beginning in the third year of life. [29] Metarepresentation refers to the capacity to conceive of representational relations themselves, and is facilitated through developing competency in distinguishing between what something represents and how it is represented. [30] [31] [32] Development of a mental state lexicon (i.e. language used to describe internal mental states, notably emotions) and some, but not all, components of pretend play are dependent on this capacity for metarepresentational cognition. [29]

Theory of Mind development reflects this capacity for metarepresentation. [9] Theory of Mind refers to common sense understanding of the world, which includes the understanding that people – inclusive of oneself - possess varied and changing mental states like thoughts, beliefs and desires. These mental states are the determining aspect of behaviour. [33] Research has shown that IO pantomime use is connected to Theory of Mind development and thus, that the lack of IO pantomimes in younger children is not the result of the child's choice or preference. [9]

Research has also provided support for children's eventual use of IO instead of BPO pantomimes as being part of the decontextualization process. [34] Decontextualization is the process through which the behaviours and objects used in pretence become increasingly detached from their real-life contexts and uses. [35] Data have shown that children between 3 and 5 years old produced fewer BPO pantomimes when asked to simply hold an imagined object, rather than demonstrating imaginary use of the object; this has been offered as support to IO over BPO pantomime use as being an indicator of the development of capacity for symbolic representation [21] and reflective coordination of symbolic representations. [36] Incidentally, reflective coordination of symbolic representations also leads to development of Theory of Mind [9] [33] and symbol use. [37] However, BPO vs. IO pantomime use in object representation can also be affected by non-developmental factors such as familiarity with the object, movement complexity, how conventionalized the movement is, and features of the object (i.e. if object changes shape during its normal use). [4]

In old age, BPO pantomimes again become more frequent; it is thought that this is due to the metarepresentational cognitive capacity diminishing with age, specifically through difficulties in the inhibition of the automatic activation of tool emblems instead of appropriate hand postures required to hold the object. [24] Additionally, it has been shown that education level can also be a factor in BPO pantomime use in normal adults, such that the higher the level of the adult's education, the fewer BPO pantomimes are used. [24]

Aphasia

Primary progressive aphasia (PPA) is a syndrome characterized by a progressive language deficit without other features of dementia for at least two years. [38] Aphasic patients exhibit impairment in gestural expression and comprehension, with the degree of impairment being commensurate with the degree of severity in aphasia. [27] Use of BPO over IO pantomimes has been used extensively in the assessment of aphasia, but with varied interpretations.

Many researchers have advanced the idea that the regressive use of BPO pantomimes reflects the presence of a central symbolic deficit in aphasic patients. [1] [39] It is suggested this is due to BPO pantomimes offering a more concrete representation of an object and permits a more vivid experience of affective component of the pretended action. [1] However, others interpret BPO pantomiming in aphasics as being indicative of apraxic motor disturbance, due to the high-comorbidity between Aphasia and Apraxia. [40]

Gestural treatment for aphasia

The key role of gesture in human communications has important implications for people with aphasia. Language impairment can be compensated for by the communicative function and facilitative role of gesture use. [39] [41]

Intention Gesture Treatment (IGT) and Pantomime Gesture Treatment (PGT) have had positive treatment effects for aphasics, with PGT being shown to be more effective with individuals with severe aphasia. [42]

Other forms of gestural training like artificial language techniques, Amerind, and American Sign Language have also been shown to reduce language impairment in aphasics; even in those with no grammatical or syntactical ability. [27] Such training also stimulates the thought processes and improves the self-concept of these patients. [27]

Apraxia

Apraxia is a neurological condition in which an individual loses the ability to execute movements that the individual is otherwise physically capable of performing.

Use of BPO pantomimes, instead of the IO pantomimes dominant in non-apraxic patients (i.e. BPO errors), is one of the diagnostic error patterns in apraxia. [14] Though BPO errors seem to be inconsistent in their efficacy for diagnosing apraxia: many studies have shown BPO errors being distinctly associated with the apraxic symptomatology; [6] [8] [43] [44] while many have shown they are not. [25] [45] However, it has been asserted that these apparently contradicting results may be due to a lack of control for confounding factors. For example, BPO errors are differentially affected by age and educational level in normal subjects; older, healthy people (tested group average 69 years old) and healthy adults with lower amount of education (tested group with average 7.2 years of formal education) make significantly more BPO errors than the average adult population. [24]

Schizophrenia

It has been found that BPO errors (i.e. use of BPO pantomimes in place of the IO pantomimes dominant in typical adult individuals) are made by patients with schizophrenia. [46] Given that BPO errors are associated with apraxia, and that past research has indicated that patients with schizophrenia have apraxia-like symptoms, [46] this is perhaps not a surprising finding. This BPO-schizophrenia association has not been extensively explored to date, and more research is required in order to better understand it.

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Aphasia</span> Inability to comprehend or formulate language

In aphasia, a person may be unable to comprehend or unable to formulate language because of damage to specific brain regions. The major causes are stroke and head trauma; prevalence is hard to determine but aphasia due to stroke is estimated to be 0.1–0.4% in the Global North. Aphasia can also be the result of brain tumors, epilepsy, autoimmune neurological diseases, brain infections, or neurodegenerative diseases.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Expressive aphasia</span> Language disorder involving inability to produce language

Expressive aphasia is a type of aphasia characterized by partial loss of the ability to produce language, although comprehension generally remains intact. A person with expressive aphasia will exhibit effortful speech. Speech generally includes important content words but leaves out function words that have more grammatical significance than physical meaning, such as prepositions and articles. This is known as "telegraphic speech". The person's intended message may still be understood, but their sentence will not be grammatically correct. In very severe forms of expressive aphasia, a person may only speak using single word utterances. Typically, comprehension is mildly to moderately impaired in expressive aphasia due to difficulty understanding complex grammar.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Language center</span> Speech processing areas of the brain

In neuroscience and psychology, the term language center refers collectively to the areas of the brain which serve a particular function for speech processing and production. Language is a core system that gives humans the capacity to solve difficult problems and provides them with a unique type of social interaction. Language allows individuals to attribute symbols to specific concepts, and utilize them through sentences and phrases that follow proper grammatical rules. Finally, speech is the mechanism by which language is orally expressed.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Broca's area</span> Speech production region in the dominant hemisphere of the hominid brain

Broca's area, or the Broca area, is a region in the frontal lobe of the dominant hemisphere, usually the left, of the brain with functions linked to speech production.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Apraxia</span> Medical condition

Apraxia is a motor disorder caused by damage to the brain, which causes difficulty with motor planning to perform tasks or movements. The nature of the damage determines the disorder's severity, and the absence of sensory loss or paralysis helps to explain the level of difficulty. Children may be born with apraxia; its cause is unknown, and symptoms are usually noticed in the early stages of development. Apraxia occurring later in life, known as acquired apraxia, is typically caused by traumatic brain injury, stroke, dementia, Alzheimer's disease, brain tumor, or other neurodegenerative disorders. The multiple types of apraxia are categorized by the specific ability and/or body part affected.

Agraphia is an acquired neurological disorder causing a loss in the ability to communicate through writing, either due to some form of motor dysfunction or an inability to spell. The loss of writing ability may present with other language or neurological disorders; disorders appearing commonly with agraphia are alexia, aphasia, dysarthria, agnosia, acalculia and apraxia. The study of individuals with agraphia may provide more information about the pathways involved in writing, both language related and motoric. Agraphia cannot be directly treated, but individuals can learn techniques to help regain and rehabilitate some of their previous writing abilities. These techniques differ depending on the type of agraphia.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Anomic aphasia</span> Medical condition

Anomic aphasia is a mild, fluent type of aphasia where individuals have word retrieval failures and cannot express the words they want to say. By contrast, anomia is a deficit of expressive language, and a symptom of all forms of aphasia, but patients whose primary deficit is word retrieval are diagnosed with anomic aphasia. Individuals with aphasia who display anomia can often describe an object in detail and maybe even use hand gestures to demonstrate how the object is used, but cannot find the appropriate word to name the object. Patients with anomic aphasia have relatively preserved speech fluency, repetition, comprehension, and grammatical speech.

The language of thought hypothesis (LOTH), sometimes known as thought ordered mental expression (TOME), is a view in linguistics, philosophy of mind and cognitive science, forwarded by American philosopher Jerry Fodor. It describes the nature of thought as possessing "language-like" or compositional structure. On this view, simple concepts combine in systematic ways to build thoughts. In its most basic form, the theory states that thought, like language, has syntax.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Conduction aphasia</span> Medical condition

Conduction aphasia, also called associative aphasia, is an uncommon form of difficulty in speaking (aphasia). It is caused by damage to the parietal lobe of the brain. An acquired language disorder, it is characterised by intact auditory comprehension, coherent speech production, but poor speech repetition. Affected people are fully capable of understanding what they are hearing, but fail to encode phonological information for production. This deficit is load-sensitive as the person shows significant difficulty repeating phrases, particularly as the phrases increase in length and complexity and as they stumble over words they are attempting to pronounce. People have frequent errors during spontaneous speech, such as substituting or transposing sounds. They are also aware of their errors and will show significant difficulty correcting them.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Global aphasia</span> Medical condition

Global aphasia is a severe form of nonfluent aphasia, caused by damage to the left side of the brain, that affects receptive and expressive language skills as well as auditory and visual comprehension. Acquired impairments of communicative abilities are present across all language modalities, impacting language production, comprehension, and repetition. Patients with global aphasia may be able to verbalize a few short utterances and use non-word neologisms, but their overall production ability is limited. Their ability to repeat words, utterances, or phrases is also affected. Due to the preservation of the right hemisphere, an individual with global aphasia may still be able to express themselves through facial expressions, gestures, and intonation. This type of aphasia often results from a large lesion of the left perisylvian cortex. The lesion is caused by an occlusion of the left middle cerebral artery and is associated with damage to Broca's area, Wernicke's area, and insular regions which are associated with aspects of language.

Transcortical sensory aphasia (TSA) is a kind of aphasia that involves damage to specific areas of the temporal lobe of the brain, resulting in symptoms such as poor auditory comprehension, relatively intact repetition, and fluent speech with semantic paraphasias present. TSA is a fluent aphasia similar to Wernicke's aphasia, with the exception of a strong ability to repeat words and phrases. The person may repeat questions rather than answer them ("echolalia").

Transcortical motor aphasia (TMoA), also known as commissural dysphasia or white matter dysphasia, results from damage in the anterior superior frontal lobe of the language-dominant hemisphere. This damage is typically due to cerebrovascular accident (CVA). TMoA is generally characterized by reduced speech output, which is a result of dysfunction of the affected region of the brain. The left hemisphere is usually responsible for performing language functions, although left-handed individuals have been shown to perform language functions using either their left or right hemisphere depending on the individual. The anterior frontal lobes of the language-dominant hemisphere are essential for initiating and maintaining speech. Because of this, individuals with TMoA often present with difficulty in speech maintenance and initiation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Primary progressive aphasia</span> Medical condition

Primary progressive aphasia (PPA) is a type of neurological syndrome in which language capabilities slowly and progressively become impaired. As with other types of aphasia, the symptoms that accompany PPA depend on what parts of the left hemisphere are significantly damaged. However, unlike most other aphasias, PPA results from continuous deterioration in brain tissue, which leads to early symptoms being far less detrimental than later symptoms.

Autotopagnosia from the Greek a and gnosis, meaning "without knowledge", topos meaning "place", and auto meaning "oneself", autotopagnosia virtually translates to the "lack of knowledge about one's own space," and is clinically described as such.

Aprosodia is a neurological condition characterized by the inability of a person to properly convey or interpret emotional prosody. Prosody in language refers to the ranges of rhythm, pitch, stress, intonation, etc. These neurological deficits can be the result of damage of some form to the non-dominant hemisphere areas of language production. The prevalence of aprosodias in individuals is currently unknown, as testing for aprosodia secondary to other brain injury is only a recent occurrence.

Ideomotor Apraxia, often IMA, is a neurological disorder characterized by the inability to correctly imitate hand gestures and voluntarily mime tool use, e.g. pretend to brush one's hair. The ability to spontaneously use tools, such as brushing one's hair in the morning without being instructed to do so, may remain intact, but is often lost. The general concept of apraxia and the classification of ideomotor apraxia were developed in Germany in the late 19th and early 20th centuries by the work of Hugo Liepmann, Adolph Kussmaul, Arnold Pick, Paul Flechsig, Hermann Munk, Carl Nothnagel, Theodor Meynert, and linguist Heymann Steinthal, among others. Ideomotor apraxia was classified as "ideo-kinetic apraxia" by Liepmann due to the apparent dissociation of the idea of the action with its execution. The classifications of the various subtypes are not well defined at present, however, owing to issues of diagnosis and pathophysiology. Ideomotor apraxia is hypothesized to result from a disruption of the system that relates stored tool use and gesture information with the state of the body to produce the proper motor output. This system is thought to be related to the areas of the brain most often seen to be damaged when ideomotor apraxia is present: the left parietal lobe and the premotor cortex. Little can be done at present to reverse the motor deficit seen in ideomotor apraxia, although the extent of dysfunction it induces is not entirely clear.

Apraxia of speech (AOS), also called verbal apraxia, is a speech sound disorder affecting an individual's ability to translate conscious speech plans into motor plans, which results in limited and difficult speech ability. By the definition of apraxia, AOS affects volitional movement pattern. However, AOS usually also affects automatic speech.

Ideational apraxia (IA) is a neurological disorder which explains the loss of ability to conceptualize, plan, and execute the complex sequences of motor actions involved in the use of tools or otherwise interacting with objects in everyday life. Ideational apraxia is a condition in which an individual is unable to plan movements related to interaction with objects, because they have lost the perception of the object's purpose. Characteristics of this disorder include a disturbance in the concept of the sequential organization of voluntary actions. The patient appears to have lost the knowledge or thought of what an object represents. This disorder was first seen 100 years ago by Doctor Arnold Pick, who described a patient who appeared to have lost their ability to use objects. The patient would make errors such as combing their hair with the wrong side of the comb or placing a pistol in his mouth. From that point on, several other researchers and doctors have stumbled upon this unique disorder. IA has been described under several names such as, agnosia of utilization, conceptual apraxia or loss of knowledge about the use of tools, or Semantic amnesia of tool usage. The term apraxia was first created by Steinthal in 1871 and was then applied by Gogol, Kusmaul, Star, and Pick to patients who failed to pantomime the use of tools. It was not until the 1900s, when Liepmann refined the definition, that it specifically described disorders that involved motor planning, rather than disturbances in the patient’s visual perception, language, or symbolism.

Neuroscience of multilingualism is the study of multilingualism within the field of neurology. These studies include the representation of different language systems in the brain, the effects of multilingualism on the brain's structural plasticity, aphasia in multilingual individuals, and bimodal bilinguals. Neurological studies of multilingualism are carried out with functional neuroimaging, electrophysiology, and through observation of people who have suffered brain damage.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sign language in the brain</span>

Sign language refers to any natural language which uses visual gestures produced by the hands and body language to express meaning. The brain's left side is the dominant side utilized for producing and understanding sign language, just as it is for speech. In 1861, Paul Broca studied patients with the ability to understand spoken languages but the inability to produce them. The damaged area was named Broca's area, and located in the left hemisphere’s inferior frontal gyrus. Soon after, in 1874, Carl Wernicke studied patients with the reverse deficits: patients could produce spoken language, but could not comprehend it. The damaged area was named Wernicke's area, and is located in the left hemisphere’s posterior superior temporal gyrus.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Goodglass, H.; Kaplan, E. (1963). "Disturbance of Gesture and Pantomime in Aphasia". Brain. 86 (4): 703–720. doi:10.1093/brain/86.4.703. ISSN   0006-8950. PMID   14090524.
  2. 1 2 3 4 Hostetter, Autumn B.; Skirving, Catherine J. (2011). "The Effect of Visual vs. Verbal Stimuli on Gesture Production". Journal of Nonverbal Behavior. 35 (3): 205–223. doi:10.1007/s10919-011-0109-2. ISSN   0191-5886.
  3. ↑ Critchley, M. (1970). Aphasiology and Other Aspects of Language. London: Edward Arnold. ISBN   978-0-7131-4158-0.
  4. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Overton, Willis F.; Jackson, Joseph P. (1973). "The Representation of Imagined Objects in Action Sequences: A Developmental Study". Child Development. 44 (2). [Wiley, Society for Research in Child Development]: 309–314. doi:10.2307/1128052. ISSN   1467-8624. JSTOR   1128052. PMID   4122334.
  5. 1 2 3 4 O'Reilly, Anne Watson (1995). "Using Representations: Comprehension and Production of Actions with Imagined Objects". Child Development. 66 (4): 999–1010. doi:10.2307/1131794. JSTOR   1131794. PMID   7671661.
  6. 1 2 Gonzalez Rothi, Leslie J.; Mack, Linda; Verfaellie, Mieke; Brown, Patrick; Heilman, Kenneth M. (1988). "Ideomotor apraxia: Error pattern analysis". Aphasiology. 2 (3–4): 381–387. doi:10.1080/02687038808248942. ISSN   0268-7038.
  7. ↑ Raymer, A.M.; Maher, L.M.; Foundas, A.L.; Heilman, K.M.; Gonzalez Rothi, L.J. (1997). "The Significance of Body Part as Tool Errors in Limb Apraxia". Brain and Cognition. 34 (2). Elsevier BV: 287–292. doi:10.1006/brcg.1997.0919. ISSN   0278-2626. PMID   9220091.
  8. 1 2 Haaland, K.York; Flaherty, David (1984). "The different types of limb apraxia errors made by patients with left vs. right hemisphere damage". Brain and Cognition. 3 (4). Elsevier BV: 370–384. doi:10.1016/0278-2626(84)90029-0. ISSN   0278-2626. PMID   6085677.
  9. 1 2 3 4 5 Suddendorf, Thomas; Fletcher-flinn, Claire; Johnston, Leah (1999-03-01). "Pantomime and Theory of Mind". The Journal of Genetic Psychology. 160 (1): 31–45. doi:10.1080/00221329909595378. ISSN   0022-1325.
  10. ↑ de Ruiter, J. P. (2000). "The production of gesture and speech". In McNeill, D. (ed.). Language and Gesture. Language Culture and Cognition. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. pp. 284–311. ISBN   978-0-521-77761-2.
  11. ↑ Krauss, R.; Chen, Y.; Gottesman, R. (2000). "Lexical gestures and lexical access: A process model.". In McNeill, D. (ed.). Language and Gesture. Language Culture and Cognition. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. pp. 261–283. ISBN   978-0-521-77761-2.
  12. ↑ Kosslyn, Stephen M. (2005). "Mental images and the Brain". Cognitive Neuropsychology. 22 (3–4): 333–347. doi:10.1080/02643290442000130. ISSN   0264-3294. PMID   21038254.
  13. 1 2 3 4 Lewis, James W. (2006). "Cortical Networks Related to Human Use of Tools". The Neuroscientist. 12 (3): 211–231. doi:10.1177/1073858406288327. ISSN   1073-8584. PMID   16684967.
  14. 1 2 3 4 Ohgami, Yuko; Matsuo, Kayako; Uchida, Nobuko; Nakai, Toshiharu (2004). "An fMRI study of tool-use gestures: body part as object and pantomime". NeuroReport. 15 (12): 1903–1906. doi:10.1097/00001756-200408260-00014. ISSN   0959-4965. PMID   15305134.
  15. ↑ Finkelnburg, F. (1870). "Niederrheinische Gesellschaft, Sitzung vom 21 März in Bonn". Berliner Klinische Wochenschrift (in German) (8): 449–462.
  16. ↑ Liepmann, H. (1905). "Das Krankheitsbild der Apraxie". Monatschrift Fur Psychiatrie und Neurologie (in German) (8): 15–44.
  17. ↑ Bastian, H.C. (1898). A Treatise on Aphasia and Other Speech Defects. Brainedness, handedness & mental abilities. London: H. K. Lewis. ISBN   978-0-404-60851-4.
  18. ↑ Critchley, M. (1939). The Language of Gesture. London: Edward Arnold.
  19. ↑ Goldstein, K. (1948). Language and Language Disturbances. New York: Grune & Stratton.
  20. ↑ Denny-Brown, D. (1958). "The nature of apraxia". Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease. 126: 9–32. doi:10.1097/00005053 (inactive 2024-04-19). PMID   13514485.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: DOI inactive as of April 2024 (link)
  21. 1 2 3 Boyatzis, Chris J.; Watson, Malcolm W. (1993). "Preschool Children's Symbolic Representation of Objects through Gestures". Child Development. 64 (3): 729–735. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.1993.tb02939.x. ISSN   0009-3920.
  22. ↑ Mercaitis, P. (1979). Performance of normal adults on a measure of pantomime expression (MA thesis). University of Massachusetts.
  23. ↑ Ohnemus, E. M. (1983). Use of body-part as object (BPO) on a test of pantomime expression in normal adults (Senior thesis). University of Massachusetts.
  24. 1 2 3 4 Peigneux, Philippe; van der Linden, Martial (1999). "Influence of Ageing and Educational Level on the Prevalence of Body-Part-as-Objects in Normal Subjects". Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology. 21 (4): 547–552. doi:10.1076/jcen.21.4.547.881. hdl:2268/241005. ISSN   1380-3395. PMID   10550811.
  25. 1 2 Duffy, Robert J; Duffy, Joseph R (1989). "An investigation of body part as object (BPO) responses in normal and brain-damaged adults". Brain and Cognition. 10 (2): 220–236. doi:10.1016/0278-2626(89)90054-7. PMID   2474308.
  26. ↑ Dovern, A.; Fink, G. R.; Weiss, P. H. (2012). "Diagnosis and treatment of upper limb apraxia". Journal of Neurology. 259 (7): 1269–1283. doi:10.1007/s00415-011-6336-y. ISSN   0340-5354. PMC   3390701 . PMID   22215235.
  27. 1 2 3 4 Peterson, Laura N.; Kirshner, Howard S. (1981). "Gestural impairment and gestural ability in aphasia: A review". Brain and Language. 14 (2): 333–348. doi:10.1016/0093-934X(81)90084-5. PMID   7306787.
  28. ↑ Piaget, J. (1962). Play, dreams, and imitation in childhood. New York: Norton.
  29. 1 2 Nielsen, Mark; Dissanayake, Cheryl (2000). "An investigation of pretend play, mental state terms and false belief understanding: In search of a metarepresentational link". British Journal of Developmental Psychology. 18 (4): 609–624. doi:10.1348/026151000165887. ISSN   0261-510X.
  30. ↑ Perner, J. (1991). Understanding the representational mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  31. ↑ Haaland, K.York; Flaherty, David (1984). "The different types of limb apraxia errors made by patients with left vs. right hemisphere damage". Brain and Cognition. 3 (4). Elsevier BV: 370–384. doi:10.1016/0278-2626(84)90029-0. ISSN   0278-2626. PMID   6085677.
  32. ↑ Pylyshyn, Zenon W. (1978). "When is attribution of beliefs justified?". Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 1 (4). Cambridge University Press (CUP): 592–593. doi:10.1017/s0140525x00076895. ISSN   0140-525X.
  33. 1 2 Astington, J. W.; Gopnik, A. (1988). "Knowing you've changed your mind: Children's understanding of representational change". In Astington, J.W.; Harris, P.L.; Olson, D.R. (eds.). Developing theories of mind. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. pp. 193–206. ISBN   978-0-521-38653-1.
  34. ↑ Bigham, Sally; Bourchier-Sutton, Alison (2007). "The decontextualization of form and function in the development of pretence". British Journal of Developmental Psychology. 25 (3): 335–351. doi:10.1348/026151006X153154. ISSN   0261-510X.
  35. ↑ Flavell, J. (1985). Cognitive development (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  36. ↑ Dick, Anthony Steven; Overton, Willis F.; Kovacs, Stacie L. (2005). "The Development of Symbolic Coordination: Representation of Imagined Objects, Executive Function, and Theory of Mind". Journal of Cognition and Development. 6 (1): 133–161. doi:10.1207/s15327647jcd0601_8. ISSN   1524-8372.
  37. ↑ DeLoache, J. S.; Burns, N. M. (1993). "Symbolic development in young children: Understanding models and pictures.". In Pratt, C.; Garton, A.F. (eds.). Systems of Representation in Young Children: Development and Use. Wiley Series in Developmental Psychology and Its Applications. New York: Wiley. pp. 91–112. ISBN   978-0-471-92501-9.
  38. ↑ Weintraub, Sandra (1990-12-01). "Primary progressive aphasia: longitudinal course, neuropsychological profile, and language features". Archives of Neurology. 47 (12). American Medical Association (AMA): 1329–1335. doi:10.1001/archneur.1990.00530120075013. ISSN   0003-9942. PMID   2252450.
  39. 1 2 Christopoulou, Christina; Bonvillian, John D. (1985). "Sign language, pantomime, and gestural processing in aphasic persons: A review". Journal of Communication Disorders. 18 (1): 1–20. doi:10.1016/0021-9924(85)90010-3. PMID   3884670.
  40. ↑ Joshi, Anish; Roy, Eric A.; Black, Sandra E.; Barbour, Kira (2003). "Patterns of limb apraxia in primary progressive aphasia". Brain and Cognition. 53 (2): 403–407. doi:10.1016/S0278-2626(03)00116-7. PMID   14607191.
  41. ↑ Marshall, Jane; Best, Wendy; Cocks, Naomi; Cruice, Madeline; Pring, Tim; Bulcock, Gemma; Creek, Gemma; Eales, Nancy; Mummery, Alice Lockhart; Matthews, Niina; Caute, Anna (2012). "Gesture and Naming Therapy for People With Severe Aphasia: A Group Study" (PDF). Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research. 55 (3): 726–738. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2011/11-0219). ISSN   1092-4388. PMID   22337498.
  42. ↑ Ferguson, Neina F.; Evans, Kelli; Raymer, Anastasia M. (2012). "A Comparison of Intention and Pantomime Gesture Treatment for Noun Retrieval in People With Aphasia". American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology. 21 (2): S126-39. doi:10.1044/1058-0360(2012/11-0076). ISSN   1058-0360. PMID   22294410.
  43. ↑ Poole, Janet L.; Gallagher, Jere; Janosky, Janine; Qualls, Clifford (1997-05-01). "The Mechanisms for Adult-Onset Apraxia and Developmental Dyspraxia: An Examination and Comparison of Error Patterns". The American Journal of Occupational Therapy. 51 (5): 339–346. doi:10.5014/ajot.51.5.339. ISSN   0272-9490. PMID   9127059.
  44. ↑ Poeck, Klaus (1986). "The clinical examination for motor apraxia". Neuropsychologia. 24 (1). Elsevier BV: 129–134. doi:10.1016/0028-3932(86)90046-1. ISSN   0028-3932. PMID   3703231.
  45. ↑ Mozaz, M. J.; Peña, J.; Barraquer, L. L.; Marti, J.; Goldstein, L. H. (1993). "Use of body part as object in brain-damaged subjects". Clinical Neuropsychologist. 7 (1): 39–47. doi:10.1080/13854049308401886. ISSN   0920-1637.
  46. 1 2 Martin, Peter; Tewesmeier, Michaela; Albers, Matthias; Schmid, Gary; Scharfetter, Christian (1994). "Investigation of gestural and pantomime performance in chronic schizophrenic inpatients". European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience. 244 (2): 59–64. doi:10.1007/BF02193520. ISSN   0940-1334.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.