CP v2

Tag: fMRI

  • MIT brain study suggests Esperanto and Klingon engage the same language network as English

    New research from MIT neuroscientists suggests the human brain processes constructed languages such as Esperanto and Klingon in much the same way it handles widely spoken natural languages. Using functional MRI, the team found that core language regions activate when proficient speakers listen to sentences in these invented languages.

    The study focused on the brain’s established language network, a set of areas that reliably responds when people hear their native tongue or another language they know well. Researchers say the findings help clarify what makes something count as language in the brain, beyond history, popularity, or cultural reach.

    How the experiment was run

    To test the idea, MIT convened speakers of several constructed languages for a weekend data-collection event in November 2022. Participants included people proficient in Esperanto, Klingon from Star Trek, Na’vi from Avatar, and High Valyrian and Dothraki from Game of Thrones.

    In total, 44 speakers underwent fMRI scanning while listening to sentences in a constructed language they knew. For comparison, they also listened to or read sentences in their native language and completed nonlinguistic tasks designed to separate language processing from general effort.

    Across participants, the same language-selective brain regions were engaged for constructed languages and native languages. The researchers interpret this as evidence that linguistic meaning and structure, not a language’s natural evolution, are key to recruiting the language network.

    Why conlangs differ from code

    The findings also sharpen a contrast the team has reported in earlier work on programming languages. While code is an invented symbolic system, prior neuroimaging results indicate it relies more heavily on the brain’s multiple demand network, which supports effortful reasoning and problem solving.

    MIT researchers argue the difference may come down to what kinds of meaning are expressed. Natural and constructed languages can describe objects, events, and internal states, whereas programming languages tend to operate as more self-contained, highly abstract systems.

    That distinction suggests a practical test for what the brain treats as language: whether it supports open-ended communication about the inner and outer world. It also implies that a relatively new language with a modest number of speakers can still be fully language-like to the brain if people become proficient in it.

    What researchers plan next

    The team says future work will probe additional constructed languages, including Lojban, which was designed to reduce ambiguity through highly explicit grammar and logic-oriented design. Researchers hope this will further narrow which properties are necessary to activate the language network.

    Beyond conlang communities, the results may inform broader debates in cognitive science about language, meaning, and human learning. They may also help separate language processing from other complex symbol systems, a distinction with implications for education and human-computer interaction.

  • Study links language networks to visual memory: Why a banana’s color may depend on words

    Our ability to store information about familiar objects depends on the connection between visual and language processing regions in the brain, according to a study published May 20 in the open-access journal PLOS Biology by Bo Liu from Beijing Normal University, China, and colleagues.

    Seeing an object and knowing visual information about it, like its usual color, activate the same parts of the brain. Seeing a yellow banana, for example, and knowing that the object represented by the word “banana” is usually yellow, both excite the ventral occipitotemporal cortex (VOTC). However, there’s evidence that parts of the brain involved in language, like the dorsal anterior temporal lobe (ATL), are also involved in this process — dementia patients with ATL damage, for example, struggle with object color knowledge, despite having relatively normal visual processing areas. To understand whether communication between the brain’s language and sensory association systems is necessary for representing information about objects, the authors tested whether stroke-induced damage to the neural pathways connecting these two systems impacted patients’ ability to match objects to their typical color. They compared color-identification behavior in 33 stroke patients to 35 demographically-matched controls, using fMRI to record brain activity and diffusion imaging to map the white matter connections between language regions and the VOTC.

    The researchers found that stronger connections between language and visual processing regions correlated with stronger object color representations in the VOTC, and supported better performance on object color knowledge tasks. These effects couldn’t be explained by variations in patients’ stroke lesions, related cognitive processes (like simply recognizing a patch of color), or problems with earlier stages of visual processing. The authors suggest that these results highlight the sophisticated connection between vision and language in the human brain.

    The authors add, “Our findings reveal that the brain’s ability to store and retrieve object perceptual knowledge — like the color of a banana — relies on critical connections between visual and language systems. Damage to these connections disrupts both brain activity and behavior, showing that language isn’t just for communication — it fundamentally shapes how sensory experiences are neurally structured into knowledge.”

  • Study suggests a part of the human auditory cortex is uniquely tuned to chimpanzee calls

    Study suggests a part of the human auditory cortex is uniquely tuned to chimpanzee calls

    The human brain is not limited to recognizing our own voices. Research from the University of Geneva (UNIGE) has revealed that specific parts of the auditory cortex react strongly to chimpanzee vocalizations. Chimpanzees are our closest relatives both genetically and in the types of sounds they produce. The study, which appears in the journal eLife, indicates that certain subregions of the brain may be especially tuned to the calls of particular primate species. This insight offers a new way to explore how voice recognition emerged and how it may relate to the development of language.

    Human voices play a central role in social communication, and a significant portion of the auditory cortex is devoted to interpreting them. Researchers wanted to know whether these abilities have deeper evolutionary origins. To investigate this question, scientists from UNIGE’s Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences used a comparative approach grounded in species evolution. By examining how the human brain processes the vocalizations of closely related species, such as chimpanzees, bonobos and macaques, they aimed to identify traits shared with other primates. This approach helps shed light on how the neural foundations of vocal communication began to emerge long before language existed.

    Studying How the Brain Responds to Primate Calls

    In the experiment, 23 human volunteers listened to vocal sounds from four species. Human voices served as the control group. Chimpanzee calls were included because these primates are closely related to us both genetically and acoustically. Bonobo vocalizations were also tested, even though they often sound more like birdsong. Macaque calls were added because these primates are more distantly related to humans both evolutionarily and acoustically. Researchers used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to examine activity across the auditory cortex. “Our intention was to verify whether a subregion sensitive specifically to primate vocalizations existed,” explains Leonardo Ceravolo, research associate at UNIGE’s Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences and first author of the study.

    A Distinct Neural Response to Chimpanzee Vocalizations

    The results confirmed their expectations. A part of the auditory cortex known as the superior temporal gyrus, which plays a key role in processing sounds related to language, music and emotional cues, showed increased activation when participants heard certain primate calls. “When participants heard chimpanzee vocalizations, this response was clearly distinct from that triggered by bonobos or macaques.”

    This pattern is particularly striking because bonobos are just as genetically close to humans as chimpanzees, yet their vocalizations differ greatly in acoustic structure. The findings suggest that both evolutionary closeness and similarity in sound features influence how the human brain reacts.

    What the Findings Suggest About Language Evolution

    This discovery offers new directions for understanding how the neural basis of communication evolved. It indicates that some parts of the human brain may have preserved a sensitivity to the calls of our closest primate relatives. “We already knew that certain areas of the animal brain reacted specifically to the voices of their fellow creatures. But here, we show that a region of the adult human brain, the anterior superior temporal gyrus, is also sensitive to non-human vocalizations,” notes Leonardo Ceravolo.

    These results support the idea that humans and great apes share vocal processing abilities that existed before spoken language emerged. They may also help explain how voice recognition develops in early life. For instance, this line of research could clarify how babies begin recognizing familiar voices while still in utero.