For over a hundred years it has been understood that the primary sit

e for processing language is situated in the left hemisphere of the

brain. Using Positron emission tomography (PET) , Functional magnetic res
onance imaging (FMRI) and event-related potential (ERP) techniques , studi
es have been able to provide supporting evidence to suggest that spec
ific language functions are linked to specific brain regions.
There has been increasing attention to the role of cortical regions o
f the left hemisphere of the brain , in language processing . More spe
cifically the superior temporal lobe , premotor cortex and the inferior
frontal cortex , have been found to be involved in the processing o
f speech sound and the retrieval of information about spoken words. R
ecent functional imaging techniques , including those demonstrating incre
ased regional blood flow , enables the study of linguistic subcomponents
such as phonology, syntax and lexical semantics , together with their
computational processing demands, to be assessed.
The view that language functions are processed at specific left hemisp
here sites , is evident in the left planum temporal, to which partici
pates in the processing of phonetic-syllabics that form words and sent
ences. It is this planum temporal region of the superior temporal lob
e that forms part of the Wernicks area , which receives projections
from the auditory system. Post â mortem examinations of patients with specif
ic impairments to linguistic abilities, also known as aphasia , have
shown that damage to the temporal and parietal lobe (Wernickes area) ca
uses semantic errors and can be understood as the inability to synchr
onise objects and ideas (anomia). Contrast to this , damage to the left
frontal lobe (Broca area) causes the inability to perform motor or ou
tput aspects of speech , the rate of speech is slow, articulation is
distorted and access to syntactic mechanisms are denied. The evidence
from studies of aphasia generally support the view that sentence proc
essing is more of an anterior basis . The fundamental problem is howe
ver , whether the brain sites involved in language processing are deter
mined by mechanisms for speaking and hearing or whether they also inv
olve other aspects of patterning.
Signed languages are fully developed natural languages , to which conta
in identical levels of linguistic organization , however they are conveye
d and perceived differently to those used for spoken language. Therefo
re studies of signed language processing can provide a unique opportun
ity to determine the neural substrates of natural language . Recent re
search investigating the brain regions and activity associated with pro
cessing syntax and semantic information , in signed language , used eve
nt-related potential (ERP) techniques and compared the findings with tho
se from previous studies of spoken.
Evidence from ERP studies of spoken languages show that violations to
semantic expectancy produce a negative potential , to which peak at aro
und 400msec after the onset (N400) the amplitude of the N400 can dec
rease linearly in semantic sentencing, increasing as the sentences decr
ease. This suggests that the N400 indexes ongoing semantic processing I
n contrast to this , syntactic violations over the left hemisphere pro
duce an anterior negativity (LAN) between 300 and 500msec , however the
LAN can begin as early as 100msec. Following the LAN a posterior p
ositivity (P600) is produced peaking at around 600msec. Both the LAN and
the P600 components follow syntactic anomalies. According to Friederici , th
e (E)LAN can be decomposed into two functional components- the ELAN ,
indexing early syntactic parsing and the LAN , reflecting morpho-syntac
tic processing.
In order to determine the extent of similarity in the neural basis
and processing for signed and spoken language , researchers at the St
ate University of New York presented deaf native signers with normal
sentences or sentences which where syntactically or semantically incorre
ct .Using EEG techniques , researchers found that when semantically incor
rect sentences where signed , a negative peak of 400msc (N400) was pro
duced over posterior sites , bilaterally. In contrast to this , when n
ative signers was presented with syntactic violations , an early LAN w
as produced at 200msec over the frontal region of both hemispheres ,
followed by a P600 at around 425-1200msec after the violation and in p
osterior regions .
The EEG results from native signers show the difference in timing and
distribution. Although both LAN and P600 produced early syntactic proces
sing , it was still being produced indicating that syntactic anomalies a
re being processed. Also the N400 bilateral distribution could show th
at semantic processing is irrespective of language modality .
The use of ERP techniques in both spoken and signed language processi
ng has shown remarkable evidence in the similarities of semantic and
syntactic processes. However the bilateral distribution of early syntact
ic processing does suggest that there is a more complex organisation
than originally thought for the neural basis of language , the possib
ility that signed language uses subsystems that are not used in the
processing of syntax in spoken language is even more evident from the
EEG results.
The available evidence from technical innovations for measuring brain a
ctivity , are shedding new light on the neural basis of language proc
essing. To date , the results from PET, FMRI and ERP studies have ope
ned up new perspectives to understanding the brain â language relationship.