Group items tagged

The gene that affects how babies pick up language has been identified. If we know more about this gene, can we nurture children and help them learn to better suit their needs and increase their language capabilities?

A good working memory is perhaps the brain's most important system when it comes to learning a new language. But it appears that working memory is first and foremost determined by our genes. Mila Vulchanova, a professor at NTNU's Department of Modern Foreign Languages, led a study of approximately one hundred ten-year-old elementary school students from Norway. Her research suggests that a good working memory is a decisive factor in developing good language skills and competency. Vulchanova states, "Not only is working memory important in learning new words, it is also important in our general language competence, in areas such as grammar skills. Working memory is connected to our ability to gather information and work with it, and to store and manipulate linguistic inputs as well as other inputs in the brain." Vulchanova's results run contrary to some conventional assumptions in both linguistics and cognitive sciences. Quite often it is believed that children acquire languages regardless of their cognitive abilities, such as perception, spatial understanding, and working memory. In other words, children don't need to learn language per se. It just comes on its own. The results from Vulchanova's research contradict this idea. Not only did the researchers find out that there is a close relationship between language competence in the first language and working memory, but that language competence in the mother tongue correlated highly with skills in a foreign language. "We have found evidence that there is a link between language development and the capacity of our working memory, and that there are common cognitive mechanisms that support the ability to learn both your mother tongue and a second language," Vulchanova says. "This is important, because it has been the tradition in linguistics to maintain that learning your native language is qualitatively different from learning a foreign language," she says.

Language in humans has evolved culturally rather than genetically, according to a new study. By modeling the ways in which genes for language might have evolved alongside language itself, the study showed that genetic adaptation to language would be highly unlikely, as cultural conventions change much more rapidly than genes. Thus, the biological machinery upon which human language is built appears to predate the emergence of language. Professor Nick Chater, University College London Cognitive, Perceptual and Brain Sciences, says: "...although we have appear to have a genetic predisposition towards language, human language has evolved far more quickly than our genes could keep up with, suggesting that language is shaped and driven by culture rather than biology. The linguistic environment is continually changing; indeed, linguistic change is vastly more rapid than genetic change. "

The importance of FOXP2, and how it affects language.

People have a deep desire to communicate with animals, as is evident from the way they converse with their dogs, enjoy myths about talking animals or devote lifetimes to teaching chimpanzees how to speak. A delicate, if tiny, step has now been taken toward the real thing: the creation of a mouse with a human gene for language.

Recent advances in our understanding of the genetic basis of human cognition (thinking) have enabled scientists at the Max Planck Institutes for Psycholinguistics, Evolutionary Anthropology, and Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences. to better understand 3 areas of language: 1. Language processing: The human genome directs the organization of the human brain and some peripheral organs that are prerequisites for the language system, and is probably responsible for the significant differences in language skills between individuals. At the extremes are people with extraordinary gifts for learning many languages and undertaking simultaneous interpretation, and people with severe congenital speech disorders. 2. Language and populations: Genetic methods have revolutionized research into many aspects of languages, including the tracing of their origins. 3. Structural differences: While languages are not inborn, certain genetic predispositions in a genetically similar population may favour the emergence of languages with particular structural characteristics - an example thereof is the distinction between languages that are tonal (such as Chinese) and non-tonal (such as German).

Al-Sayyid is a village in Israel, populated by congenitally-deaf people. Over the past 75 years, the villagers have created an entirely new and unique language, Al-Sayyid Bedouin Sign Language (ABSL). The seeds emerged spontaneously among the first deaf residents and, three generations later, it has flowered into a complex language capable of expressing anything a spoken one can. Since its discovery by linguists in 2000, ABSL has captivated researchers driven by two fundamental questions: how did language emerge, and what can that tell us about the nature of the human mind? ABSL offers a unique opportunity to test a theory that has dominated linguistics since the 1950s. Put forth by Noam Chomsky, it claims that language is an innate and uniquely human trait, programmed into our genes. Children are born with a "language instinct" that compels them to effortlessly acquire whatever language (or languages) they are immersed in as toddlers.

This article explores the role of the human language gene (FOXP2) in mice and how it has affected them cognitively.

The FOXP2 gene, a front-runner to explain the evolution of language in humans, may have rewired the brain to allow more advanced learning, according to preliminary research presented at the Society for Neuroscience annual meeting this month. In a recent experiment, Christiane Schreiweis of the Max Planck Institute and colleagues looked at the human version of the gene in mice.

Of the 20,000 genes in the human genome, few are more fascinating than FOXP2, a gene that underlies the faculty of human speech. All animals have an FOXP2 gene, but the human version's product differs at just 2 of its 740 units from that of chimpanzees, suggesting that this tiny evolutionary fix may hold the key to why people can speak and chimps cannot.

People have a deep desire to communicate with animals, as is evident from the way they converse with their dogs, enjoy myths about talking animals or devote lifetimes to teaching chimpanzees how to speak. A delicate, if tiny, step has now been taken toward the real thing: the creation of a mouse with a human gene for language.

Do genes cause a preferance for tonal or non tonal languages? Possibly. Researchers have discovered ASPM and microcephalin, two genes that are linked to brain growth, may cause a preference for tonal languages.

Scientists have implemented the human gene deemed responsible for our ability to communicate into a strain of mice. This could be the first step towards having talking animals someday, and it also allows us to understand more about how genetics affect language.

This paper discusses how the gene FOXP2 is related to certain speech and language disorders, such as apraxia, or difficulty coordinating parts of the mouth to form speech. This research is important when placed into the wider debate of Nature Vs. Nurture, as it demonstrates that genetics may have the capacity to influence language acquisition.

"Birds learn to sing their songs and babies learn to make the sounds of their language in the same way.... Furthermore, both birds and humans go through a period [critical period] when learning is best accomplished... the brain architecture supporting babbling and birdsong is similar...the same mutated gene, FOXP2, is implicated in both [birdsong and speech]."

What a find! He talks about so many of the things we've touched on, and the fact that he titles his post "Birds R Us" is just too funny. :) I like that he provides the links to the original research, too.

An article which describes the background and ideas behind Mark Pagel's book, "Wired for Culture" and how language is intertwined in our society and cultural background.

Robert Provine, a neuroscientist and professor of psychology at the University of Maryland, summarizes a decade's worth of research in this article. He concludes that laughter is primarily a social vocalization that binds people together. It is a hidden language that we all speak. It is not a learned group reaction but an instinctive behavior programmed by our genes. Laughter bonds us through humor and play. He also explores gender differences in regard to the role of laughter in communication, also laughter as a tool in romance/pair-bonding.