400 likes | 582 Views
Evidence For Cortical Specialization And Cortical Plasticity In Early Human Language Development Professor Dan Levitin’s Class, April 3, 2001 Laura Ann Petitto McGill University Department of Psychology &
E N D
Evidence For Cortical Specialization And Cortical Plasticity In Early Human Language Development • Professor Dan Levitin’s Class, April 3, 2001 • Laura Ann Petitto • McGill University Department of Psychology & • McDonnell-Pew Cognitive Neuroscience Centre • McConnell Brain Imaging Centre • Montreal Neurological Institute • FUNDING: NSERC, MRC, SSHRC, McDonnell-Pew Foundation • Guggenheim Foundation, Spencer Foundation
BEHAVIORAL LEVELWHAT WE KNOW Birth 12 Months
BEHAVIORAL & NEURAL WHAT’S THE LINK? • What brain mechanisms underlie the infant’s ability to acquire language? • What components of the environment are most critical? • What is the neural basis for Language... • Sound vs Patterns?
PREVAILING ASSUMPTION • Speech or Sound is • Critical to • Language • Acquisition • & its’ • Cerebral organization
PREVAILING ASSUMPTION Speech modality set before birth
NEW ANSWERS FROM STUDY OF SIGNED LANGUAGES • Brain is set for specific patterns found in • Natural Language • NOT speech • Modality is set after birth • NOT before birth • Mechanism is an interaction of • Perceptual, Neural Substrates dedicated to aspects of Natural Language patterning & Motor • Very early brain development involves • neural pathways linking and • differentiating these properties
THREE TYPES OF DISCOVERIES • 1. Similar timing milestones • in sign & speech • 2. Structural homologues • in sign & speech • manual babbling & • its physical parameters • 3. Similar brain activation (PET) • in sign & speech
SIGN & SPEECH IDENTICAL TIME COURSE • 10 BABBLING • (Petitto, 1984, 1985a, 1987a, 1988; • Petitto & Marentette, 1991) • 12 FIRST WORDS-FIRST SIGNS • (Petitto, 1983, 1984, 1985a, 1988; Petitto & Marentette, 1990) • 18 FIRST 2 WORDS-FIRST 2 SIGNS • (Petitto, 1987a, 1988, 1992) • 24 MORPHOLOGICAL & SYNTACTIC • (Petitto, 1984; Petitto & Bellugi, 1989) • SEMANTIC • (Petitto & Charron, 1988; Charron & Petitto, 1991) • PRAGMATICS & DISCOURSE • (Petitto, 1984; Charron & Petitto, 1991; Wilbur & Petitto, 1981, 1983)
BILINGUALS • Hearing • Signed & Spoken • Hearing Controls • 2 Spoken
RARE POPULATION • HEARING infants exposed exclusively to signed languages, no systematic spoken language input in early life • MONOLINGUAL • ASL or LSQ, NO speech • BILINGUAL • ASL and LSQ, NO speech
HEARING NO SPEECHMONOLINGUAL SIGN INPUT • AGE AT • FIRST SIGN 11.8 10
TIMING MILESTONES SPEECH & SIGN • TIME OF FIRST • WORD AND • FIRST SIGN • SAME
DISCOVERY OF STRUCTURAL HOMOLOGUES • PROPERTIES • WHY IMPORTANT? • Shows Neuroanatomical neurophysiological developments of the motor control of speech production NOT necessary for babbling
WHY IMPORTANT? • OLD HYPOTHESIS • “...a rhythmic alternation between an open and closed • configuration of the vocal tract accompanied by phonation.” • “...oscillations of the mandible...” • (MacNeilage & Davis, 1990; Studdert-Kennedy, 1991) • YES rhythmic alternation • NO oscillations of mandible • NEW HYPOTHESIS • Same mechanism underlies Vocal & Manual babbling • Mechanism=Rhythmic Oscillator • HOW TO STUDY?
OPTOTRAK MOTION TEMPORAL ANALYSES OF HANDS & FEET • Petitto, • Holowka, • Sergio & • Ostry • (under • Review)
OPTOTRAK METHODS • SUBJECTS • 6, 10, 12 months (Hearing, Deaf, Bilinguals) • METHODS • 16 IREDS (8 hands, 8 feet) • PROCEDURES • 5 CONDITIONS • 1. Parent talking/signing • 2. Parent smiling • 3. Object in sight & out of reach; In sight & in reach • 4. Imitation: Meaningless hands;Real sign sentences • 5. Infant “alone”
OPTOTRAK QUESTIONS • MANUAL BABBLING vs RHYTHMIC HANDS • Rhythmic hand movements: All • Rhythmic hand movements: Deaf • INPUT: SIGN PROSODY • Signing Adult to Adult • Signing Adult to Infant • COMPARISONS WITH SPEECH
RESULTS BABBLING & RHYTHMIC HAND MOVEMENTS HAVE DIFFERENT TEMPORAL & SPATIAL PATTERNING
RESULTS • Power Analyses • Movement Frequency (cycles per second)
Common Same Mechanism Tissue PET 1. Milestones 2. Babbling 3. Temporal patterning IMPLICATIONS
PET & MRI STUDIES • PETITTO • ZATORRE • GAUNA • NIKELSKI • DOSTIE & • EVANS. • PNAS, • 2000
QUESTIONS • CEREBRAL BLOOD FLOW (CBF) OF ADULTS • Speech & Spoken language • Left hemisphere in processing language • QUESTIONS • What neural mechanisms mediate linguistic processing at these sites? • Are these sites “speech-specific?” • Or are these sites more general neural substrates tuned to specific types of patterns encoded • in natural language?
SUBJECTS • FIRST-TIME CROSS-LINGUISTIC DESIGN • 11 Profoundly Deaf People • 5 native signers of ASL Independent • 6 native signers of LSQ Replication • 10 Hearing Controls • 5 ASL Stimuli “Hearing 1” • 5 LSQ Stimuli “Hearing 2” • PRE-PET BEHAVIORAL SCREENING TASKS • i. No other neurological damage in deaf people • ii. Comparable high linguistic proficiency across • deaf & hearing
METHODS • EVERY SUBJECT • • PET • Blood Flow • during task • • MRI • • PET & MRI scans were co-registered for precise neuroanatomical identification
CONDITIONS • IN FIVE CONDITIONS... RESPONSE • 1. Visual Fixation Viewing • 2. Meaningless Phonetic/Syllabic “Nonsigns” Viewing • 3. Meaningful Signs Viewing • 4. Meaningful Signs Imitate • 5. Signed Nouns Generate a Signed Verb • HEARING • Same except C5: Printed word & generate a spoken verb • STIMULI • High frequency, Single-handed Nouns • All tasks performed twice with different stimuli
SUMMARY • Left Inferior Frontal Cortex - LEXICAL • Superior Temporal Gyrus - SUBLEXICAL FINDINGS alter our assumption about the neuroanatomy of Language as being tied to speech QUESTION - What about neuroantomy of tissue as being tied to modality?
H1 H1 H2 H2 H1 H1 H2 H1 PT PT PT PT PT NEW MRI: MORPHOMETRY OF A1, HG, & PT- DEAF & HEARING • Cismaru, Penhune, Petitto, • Dorsaint-Pierre, Klein & Zatorre (1999) • Sagittal (x-58) Horizontal (z=8) Coronal (y=-16)
SIGNIFICANCE • No differences in Grey matter volumes of HG or PT • = DEAF No cell loss • No differences in White matter volumes of HG • = DEAF No loss of neuronal input into A1 • FUNCTIONALITY OF CORTEX IS MAINTAINED • IN DEAF BRAIN • HOW? WHY?
HYPOTHESIS & RESEARCH • ANSWER • Ongoing sign language processing • IMPLICATION • Tissue dedicated to function not modality • NEW QUESTIONS • Polymodal sites? • Reorganization?
NEW FINDINGS Adult Brain Child Brain WHAT IT MEANS Speech organized PET STUDIES Sign & Speech same sites Neural Subs Speech determined ACQUI STUDIES Sign & Speech same course
ANSWER BRAIN IS SET FOR PATTERNS PRESENT IN LANGUAGE NOT MODALITY
CONCLUSION • Cortical Plasticity • Speech is not critical • Modality is set after birth • Cortical Specialization • Neural systems sensitive to particular • Distributional patterns relevant to • Aspects of natural language • Regardless of the modality • Early brain development consists of • Dedicated neural tissue • & those that become dedicated